Worship and the Risen Jesus in the Pauline Letters (Studies in Biblical Literature) [New ed.] 9781433122903, 9781453911549, 1433122901

Table of contents :
Cover
Contents
Illustrations
Acknowledgments
Series Editor’s Preface
Abbreviations
Chapter One: Introduction to Worship in the Pauline Communities
Chapter Two: The Problem of Defining Worship
Chapter Three: A Proposed Definition and Criteria for Worship
Chapter Four: Description of Pauline Worship in Light of Language
Chapter Five: Practical Expressions of Worship in the Pauline Letters
Chapter Six: The Purpose and Ultimate Goal of Worship in Paul
Chapter Seven: Summary and Conclusions
NOTES
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Index of Scripture and Extrabiblical References

Citation preview

Advance Praise for

Worship and the Risen Jesus in the Pauline Letters “Tony Costa offers here a thoughtful and intensive investigation of worship as reflected in the Pauline Corpus. His particular contributions lie in his detailed analysis of the vocabulary of worship in Paul, and in his engagement with other scholarship. His work comprises a genuine contribution to the analysis of the religious life of earliest Christianity.” Larry W. Hurtado, Professor Emeritus, New Testament Language, Literature and Theology, University of Edinburgh, Scotland “Tony Costa’s work helpfully reviews scholarship and most importantly provides in-depth exploration of Paul’s Christocentric approach to worship. This work offers fresh insights on worship from a biblical perspective and makes a vital contribution to the subject.” Craig S. Keener, Professor New Testament, Asbury Theological Seminary, Wilmore, Kentucky “In this ground-breaking study on the concept of worship in the early Church, Tony Costa explores the phenomenon by going back to the earliest New Testament writer, Paul. He explores the various words, expressions, and ritual actions of worship offered by Paul in his letters, then proposes a comprehensive definition of worship and criteria for identifying it. Costa calls attention to the fact that, for Paul, acts of worship are not as limited as we may have imagined. I find especially valuable Costa’s treatment of the integral role of Jesus within the worship experience of the Pauline faith communities. This has profound implications, suggesting a very high Christology within the early Church. Costa brings a fresh perspective, and I recommend this book to those interested in the area of earliest Christian worship and Christology.” Michael R. Licona, Associate Professor of Theology, Houston Baptist University, Houston, Texas “The corpus of the Apostle Paul is the oldest body of Christian literature, and the way that he approaches the person of Christ in relation to worship is therefore of supreme significance. In this new work, Tony Costa presents a detailed argument for seeing the writings of the Apostle Paul as the first in a long line of Christian works that have found the raison d’être of human existence in the worship of the Lord Jesus Christ. His argument is sound and deeply persuasive and provides cogent proof that the Church’s ascription of deity to Jesus of Nazareth has been right and true. I wish it a wide reading and impact.” Michael A. G. Haykin, Professor of Church History and Biblical Spirituality, The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, Louisville, Kentucky

Worship AND THE Risen Jesus IN THE Pauline Letters

Studies in Biblical Literature

Hemchand Gossai General Editor Vol. 157

PETER LANG

New York · Washington, D.C./Baltimore · Bern Frankfurt · Berlin · Brussels · Vienna · Oxford

Tony Costa

Worship AND THE Risen Jesus IN THE Pauline Letters

PETER LANG

New York · Washington, D.C./Baltimore · Bern Frankfurt · Berlin · Brussels · Vienna · Oxford

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Costa, Tony. Worship and the risen Jesus in the Pauline letters / Tony Costa. pages cm. — (Studies in biblical literature; Vol. 157) Includes bibliographical references and index. 1. Bible. Epistles of Paul—Criticism, interpretation, etc. 2. Public worship—Biblical teaching. I. Title. BS2655.P89C67 227’.06—dc23 2013018191 ISBN 978-1-4331-2290-3 (hardcover) ISBN 978-1-4539-1154-9 (e-book) ISSN 1089-0645

Bibliographic information published by Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek. Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the “Deutsche Nationalbibliografie”; detailed bibliographic data is available on the Internet at http://dnb.d-nb.de/.

The paper in this book meets the guidelines for permanence and durability of the Committee on Production Guidelines for Book Longevity of the Council of Library Resources.

© 2013 Peter Lang Publishing, Inc., New York 29 Broadway, 18th floor, New York, NY 10006 www.peterlang.com All rights reserved. Reprint or reproduction, even partially, in all forms such as microfilm, xerography, microfiche, microcard, and offset strictly prohibited. Printed in Germany

Contents

List of Illustrations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii Acknowledgments. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .ix Series Editor’s Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .xi Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .xiii Chapter One: Introduction to Worship in the Pauline Communities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Chapter Two: The Problem of Defining Worship. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Chapter Three: A Proposed Definition and Criteria for Worship . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 Chapter Four: Description of Pauline Worship in Light of Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 Chapter Five: Practical Expressions of Worship in the Pauline Letters . . . . . . . . . . 145 Chapter Six: The Purpose and Ultimate Goal of Worship in Paul . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 233 Chapter Seven: Summary and Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 251 Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 279 Bibliography. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 437 Index. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 479

Illustrations

Figure 1.

Breakdown of Pauline Worship Words . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 275

Tables 1.

Pauline Words Used for Worship and Their Referents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128

2.

Pauline Words Used for Worship Scaled by Levels of Strength . . . . . . . . . . . . 128

3.

Frequency of Pauline Words for Worship in New Testament Letters . . . . . . 262

Acknowledgments

This work is first and foremost dedicated to the glory and praise of the Triune God who has given me the grace, strength, and stamina to complete it. I would also like to thank my beloved wife R.Vida Ulbikas who has been my faithful and constant companion in my educational work and pursuits. Her love, dedication, assistance, and support through the years and to the present has been my source of encouragement and endurance. This work would never have been completed without her by my side. I would also like to thank my doctoral supervisor Prof. Dr. Jan van der Watt who has been to me not only a distinguished scholar but a dear friend. He is indeed “a friend who sticks closer than a brother” (Proverbs 18:24). His indefatigable support and guidance in my research served as a compass for my work. I will always be grateful for his influence in my academic work. I am also very grateful to Prof. Dr. David P. Moessner of the Texas Christian University who has assisted in my research as my co-supervisor and external examiner. His recommendations resulted in improving the quality my research. Last but not least, I dedicate this work in loving memory of my dear mother, Maria Donaria Costa, who would have been proud to witness this achievement.

Series Editor’s Preface

More than ever the horizons in biblical literature are being expanded beyond that which is immediately imagined; important new methodological, theological, and hermeneutical directions are being explored, often resulting in significant contributions to the world of biblical scholarship. It is an exciting time for the academy as engagement in biblical studies continues to be heightened. This series seeks to make available to scholars and institutions, scholarship of a high order, and which will make a significant contribution to the ongoing biblical discourse. This series includes established and innovative directions, covering general and particular areas in biblical study. For every volume considered for this series, we explore the question as to whether the study will push the horizons of biblical scholarship. The answer must be yes for inclusion. In this volume Tony Costa examines the role of worship in the context of Pauline letters and the Pauline communities. The importance of this work lies in the fact that it is a comprehensive exploration of the themes of Christian worship in relation to the risen Jesus Christ in Paul. Using an exegetical-theological method, the author provides an extensive analysis of select Pauline pericopes that speak to Christian worship seeking to interpret and understand such from the socialcultural environment of Paul. I believe that this study will be of great benefit to the academy and the Church. The arguments and conclusions must be reckoned with. The horizon has been expanded. Hemchand Gossai Series Editor

Abbreviations

AB ABD AMP ASV BAGD

BCE BDAG

BDB BETL ca. CE CEV cf. chap.

Anchor Bible Anchor Bible Dictionary. Edited by D. N. Freedman. 6 vols. New York, 1992 Amplified Bible American Standard Version Bauer,W., W. F. Arndt, F. W. Gingrich, and F. W. Danker. Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. 2nd ed. Chicago, 1979 Before Common Era Bauer, W., F. W. Danker, W. F. Arndt, and F. W. Gingrich. Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. 3rd ed. Chicago, 2000. Brown, F., S. R. Driver, and C. A. Briggs A Hebrew-English Lexicon of the Old Testament. Oxford, 1907 Bibliotheca ephemeridum theologicarum lovaniensium circa Common Era Contemporary English Version confer, compare chapter

XIV

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

ed. eds. e.g. ERV esp. ESV et al. DPL frg. FRLANT GNT HCSB ibid. ICC IDB i.e. IVP JBL JSNT JSNTSup KJV lit. LXX MS MSS MT NAB NASB NCB NCV NEB NET NICNT NICOT

editor, edited (by); edition editors exempli gratia, for example English Revised Version especially English Standard Version et alii, and others Dictionary of Paul and His Letters. Edited by G. H. Hawthorne, R. P. Martin, and D. G. Reid. Downers Grove, 1993 fragment Forschurgen zur Religion und Literatur des und Neuen Testament Good News Translation (= Good News Bible = Today’s English Version) Holman Christian Standard Bible ibidem, in the same place International Critical Commentary The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible. Edited by G. A. Buttrick. 4 vols. Nashville, 1962 id est, that is InterVarsity Press (abbrev. used only in commentary series name) Journal of Biblical Literature Journal for the Study of the New Testament Journal for the Study of the New Testament: Supplement Series King James Version literally Septuagint manuscript manuscripts Masoretic Text New American Bible New American Standard Bible New Century Bible New Century Version New English Bible New English Translation New International Commentary on the New Testament New International Commentary on the Old Testament

ABBREVIATIONS

NIDNTT NIGTC NIV NJB NKJV NLT NovTSup no. nos. NRSV NT NTS OT p. pp. par. PAST Ps Pss REB repr. rev. RSV SP sec. TBT TDNT

trans. vol. vols. v. vv. vs. WBC WUNT

|

XV

New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology. Edited by C. Brown. 4 vols. Grand Rapids, 1975–1985 New International Greek Testament Commentary New International Version (1984, 1996) New Jerusalem Bible New King James Version New Living Translation, 2nd ed. Supplements to Novum Testamentum number numbers New Revised Standard Version New Testament New Testament Studies Old Testament page pages parallel Pauline Studies Psalm Psalms Revised English Bible reprint revised (by) Revised Standard Version Sacra Pagina section The Bible Today Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. Edited by G. Kittel and G. Friedrich. Translated by G. W. Bromiley. 10 vols. Grand Rapids, 1964–1976 translator, translated (by) volume volumes verse verses versus Word Biblical Commentary Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament

CHAPTER ONE

Introduction to Worship in the Pauline Communities

The intent and purpose of this book is to examine the subject of Christian worship within the Pauline letters and its relation to the risen Jesus. This book is also interested in the question of whether the risen Jesus was a recipient of worship in the Pauline faith communities. Paul’s letters are the earliest written documents in the New Testament.1 They are therefore the first written documents dealing with the subject of Christian worship and the risen Jesus.2 There is a need as this work seeks to show, to investigate further the subject of worship and its dynamics within Paul and his communities.

1.1. The Research Problem While there have been scholarly works on the theme of early Christian worship,3 they have often approached this area of study from a broad and general perspective by viewing it through the lenses of the entire text of the NT.4 This methodology typically blends various passages of the NT that deal with worship and merges them to create a unified whole. This practice tends to ignore the uniqueness of the various texts that emphasize different themes and social settings (including worship) to their respective audiences. I will argue in this study that little consideration has been given to the topic of worship within Paul’s letters.5

2

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

While some work exists, I feel an in-depth investigation should be undertaken for reasons I will set out below.6 Examination of various aspects or elements of worship in the Pauline literature have been presented in scholarship, but not a comprehensive study on the word worship and its definition and criteria. The recent work of Nijay K. Gupta7 enters into the area of worship within Paul’s letters, but his main focus is placed on the theology and ethics of Paul’s cultic metaphors that he employs in his letters.8 It should be noted that even The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church9 contains no entry on the definition of the word worship. In James D. G. Dunn’s work The Theology of Paul the Apostle,10 an important work in Pauline studies, there is no chapter dealing specifically with the subject of worship in the Pauline communities.11 Paul’s theology is closely tied with the worship of God. Research on Pauline prayer material, and by extension worship material, has been undertaken and surveyed by Roland Gebauer,12 and helpful studies have been contributed by Peter T. O’Brien,13 and Gordon P. Wiles.14 These studies, however, tend to focus or gravitate on particular elements of worship such as prayer and thanksgiving. Notwithstanding these valuable scholarly contributions, W. B. Hunter still maintains that “scholarly interest in NT prayer material has been relatively slight.”15 Hunter further laments the fact that “academic study of Pauline prayer material continues to be truncated.”16 Here Hunter focuses mainly on the place of prayer in Paul. Prayer, however, is only one element within the wider context of worship, and therefore forms only a partial picture. There thus remains a need to explore the topic of worship within Paul at a deeper level. Throughout this study, I will use the terms Pauline faith communities and Pauline congregations synonymously and interchangeably. This will also apply to the use of these words in the singular.17 I will include the person of the risen Jesus in this study of worship in Paul. The risen Jesus appears to be central to Paul in his letters.18 I will investigate and see how this pertains to the worshipping practices of the Pauline faith communities, including the question of the worship of the risen Jesus. I will not be exploring the subject of Christology in Paul, but will only allude to it when it is related to or germane to the subject of worship.19 An in-depth study of a possible relationship between Christian worship and the place of the risen Jesus in the Pauline literature will be investigated. This study will only deal with the relation of the risen Jesus to the worship of the Pauline communities and will not address the nature of the resurrection of Jesus.20 A number of scholars in the past have examined the relationship between the resurrection of Jesus and the formation of the Christian faith, including worship. They saw the resurrection of Jesus as the major interpreting factor in Christianity.21 Such studies on the relationship between the resurrection of Jesus and the formation of the Christian faith were undertaken inter alia by Johannes Weiss22 and Maurice Goguel.23 Floyd V. Filson in his work

INTRODUCTION TO WORSHIP IN THE PAULINE COMMUNITIES

| 3

Jesus Christ the Risen Lord24 argues that “[t]he entire New Testament was written from the post-resurrection viewpoint . . . The interpreting clue and organizing fact of biblical theology is the resurrection of Jesus.”25 The studies of Filson, Goguel, and Weiss, however, do not directly impact and address a possible co-relation between Christian worship and the risen Jesus at a deeper level. Filson’s work, for example, deals more with a systematic-theological approach to Christology, rather than an in-depth study of the dynamics involved in Christian worship and its relation to the risen Jesus. The work of Filson, Goguel, and Weiss, also approaches this situation from a very general perspective. They all advance from an expansive perspective by using the NT as a whole, a tendency that, as pointed out above, becomes too widespread and too broad. I am not necessarily arguing for or against the position of these scholars, but merely pointing out the scope of study in the area of Christian worship and the risen Jesus. Rather than approaching this area from a general scope, I intend to narrow it to the Pauline letters. In this study, the methodology that will be employed will be the exegeticaltheological method.26 It is not my intention to canvass all the interpretive methodologies in scholarship in the treatment of worship in Paul.27 In the exegeticaltheological method,28 I will analyze various Pauline passages grammatically and syntactically. I will provide the Greek text first followed by an English translation. In the study of a particular Greek word used by Paul, I will provide preliminary lexicographical information and investigate the possible range of meanings of a given word based on context. I intend to analyze the respective Pauline texts on worship based on their immediate context and the grammar employed by Paul to communicate what constituted worship for him. This exegetical approach will thus be one which will give close attention to words, language, and the semantic range of the words Paul uses to designate worship. On a theological level, I intend to systematize the materials that constitute the Pauline concept of worship based on their linguistic contexts, and place them into Paul’s overall theological worldview. Paul’s theological worldview in respect to worship is thus dependent on the language he uses to construct a model or paradigm for the worship of God. In this study, I move first from the exegetical level and then, secondly, to the theological level. While this study will primarily employ the exegetical-theological method, I also acknowledge that Paul’s approach to worship also stems from his social-cultural environment. The ideas expressed by words have their existence and relevance within a cultural ecological system. When necessary I will allude to the socialcultural milieu in which Paul lived and interacted in our treatment of worship.29 Luke Timothy Johnson30 in his study of religious experience in earliest Christianity (which includes worship), raises an important point to bear in mind when approaching and exegeting NT passages dealing with worship. Johnson comments:

4

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

The academic study of earliest Christianity has been dominated for over a hundred years by what is usually referred to as the historical-critical method, although, as I have argued elsewhere, it is more properly called a historical model . . . [T]his model has paid little attention to the specifically religious language of the New Testament.31

Johnson has called attention to the fact that if one approaches the NT text mainly from a strictly historical-critical methodological approach, one runs the risk of missing the existential spiritual life dimensions of the texts. I understand that the texts in Paul pertaining to worship which will be explored are religious in nature. Johnson’s recommendation is that scholars not lose sight of this important element when approaching the texts. I merely mention this point in passing as a helpful reminder and aid to appreciate the religious and phenomenological element of the various Pauline texts.

1.2. Map of the Argument We will begin in chapter 2 by first assessing the subject of worship in Paul, its origins, and the problem of defining worship. We will also examine the views of six prominent scholars who have specialized in the area of Christian worship as key exponents, namely, Oscar Cullmann, C. F. D. Moule, D. Gerhard Delling, Ralph  P. Martin, Ferdinand Hahn, and David  E. Aune, and investigate their definitions and criteria for worship. I will address the views of three contemporary scholars on worship, namely, Larry W. Hurtado, Jerome H. Neyrey, and Richard Bauckham. I will examine each of their views regarding early Christian worship and assess the present status of scholarly studies on worship. I will further discuss how we can take the study on worship further. In chapter 3, I will propose a working definition of worship and criteria and observe how it ties into Paul’s view and treatment of worship in his letters. We will examine both the object and subject within the worship paradigm and explore whether there is in Paul, a qualification or criteria for proper worship. We will then investigate the subject of the worshipping community as the family of God. I will treat the idea of honor in relationship to God and others, and how honor ties into the notion of worship. I will investigate various metaphors such as servant, child, and family, and observe how they are used to describe the relationship of the worshipper to God. In chapter 4, an investigation and examination of passages within the Pauline letters where the various words and language for “worship” appear will also be undertaken.32 Among the words used by Paul for worship the following will be examined: 1. 2.

latreu,w (Rom 1:9, 25; Phil 3:3; cf. 2 Tim 1:3) latrei,a (Rom 9:4; 12:1)

INTRODUCTION TO WORSHIP IN THE PAULINE COMMUNITIES

3. 4. 5. 6.

| 5

seba,zomai (Rom 1:25) proskune,w (1 Cor 14:25) douleu,w (Rom 12:11; 14:18; 16:18; 1 Thess 1:9–10; cf. Col 3:24) qrhskei,a (Col 2:18)

These words were selected due to their place in their respective contexts in which they denote a specific religious relationship between the human subject(s), and the divine object, God. In this study we will analyze these words and examine them from the perspective of not only their lexical meaning, but also their meaning in the social-cultural setting of Paul’s day. We will examine how they fit into the category of worship and why Paul selected these particular words to denote worship, and how they in turn shaped his theological worldview. The subject of idolatry and its relation to worship will be examined in Paul. We will also investigate how Paul employed the metaphor of the worshipping community as the temple of God to safeguard worship against idolatry, while at the same time, evoking worship themes. I will proceed in chapter 5 to examine the various practical expressions and acts or actions used in Paul’s letters that denote worship. I am interested in how Paul treats and understands these expressions in a worship context in comparison to the words Paul employs for “worship.” We will investigate the following: 1. 2. 3. 4.

invocation prayer wish prayers hymns

In addition to these, I wish to examine two other expressions or actions of worship that I will term substantive and tangible actions of worship. I employ this term because these expressions have a material or concrete dimension to them in that they involve physical visible elements which yet possess spiritual significance.33 They are: 5. 6.

Baptism Eucharist

I will examine these various practical expressions that commonly denote worship because of the implicit relationship they communicate between the worshipper and God. In each of these expressions, there is an implicit paradigm that can be construed in both a servant-master and / or child-parent relationship, which I will expand further throughout this study. I intend to investigate how these practical expressions of worship relate to the place of the risen Jesus in Christian worship, while also including the question of the worship of the risen Jesus. In regards to

6

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

baptism and the Eucharist, I will seek to examine these two Christian practices or observances from the perspective of their ultimate reference point, which is God, and more specifically the risen Jesus. In this respect, these Christian practices also imply a relationship between the worshipper and God vis-à-vis the elements used in both baptism and the Eucharist. In chapter 6, I will bring this study to a climatic close by examining what Paul believes is the ultimate goal and purpose of worship. I will also assess the role the risen Jesus plays in Paul’s teleological view of worship. I hope to achieve this by giving special attention to the Carmen Christi (Phil 2:6–11) where this study will focus primarily and specifically on the final three verses found in Phil 2:9–11. In chapter 7, I will conclude by summarizing the arguments and points made throughout this study and conclusively offer what I believe to be a working definition for worship and a set of criteria for determining the parameters of worship. In addition, I will also put forth some further considerations regarding the subject of this study in academic research.

1.3. Hypothesis In proposing a hypothesis, I acknowledge that one inevitably runs the risk and charge of circular argumentation. A hypothesis begins with an assumption that comes to light in the text(s) under study. One examines the text(s) and undertakes a study of the words and concepts found within the given context of the material. This is followed by a methodological treatment of discovered information or data and the categorization of such information from the text(s). In this process, one aligns various data gathered from various passages together and observes that certain patterns emerge. The collection of such information proceeds to advance a summary argument towards a logical and satisfactory conclusion. The gathered evidence leading to the conclusion will either determine or disprove the legitimacy of the proposed hypothesis. The intention of this study is to critically examine and explore the Pauline texts dealing with worship and its relation to the risen Jesus and to gather various data from them. I will assess the data that has been gathered and gleaned from the Pauline texts and then arrive at a conclusion. I will evaluate whether it justifies or discredits my hypothesis. My approach to this research will be an inductive one. I will gather various pieces of information related to the subject of this thesis and observe what conclusion(s) they lead us to. This hypothesis intends to study the concept of worship in Paul as a composite and comprehensive one, involving a personal religious relationship between the worshipper and the worshipped. This relationship is communicated by various actions that are undertaken by the worshipper towards the worshipped object,

INTRODUCTION TO WORSHIP IN THE PAULINE COMMUNITIES

| 7

which serve to establish the context in which worship occurs. Worship, in order to be understood, necessitates a clear definition and criteria in a religious context. In the absence of a clear definition and criteria for worship, it is difficult to speak of worship at all. A proper working definition of worship with supplied criteria must therefore first be established in order to understand what Paul believed about worship and its qualifications. A definition of worship in Paul will be ascertained and substantiated by the words Paul employs in his letters for “worship” and in the practical expressions in the faith communities, which for Paul also communicate the notion of worship to God. There are legitimate and illegitimate forms of worship in Paul’s view, and the legitimacy or illegitimacy of worship for Paul is predicated on the identity of the object of worship. Worship in Paul seems to be related in one way or another to the presence of the risen Jesus in the worshipping communities. This co-relation is not explicit but rather indirect and implicit. While the place of the risen Jesus in Christian worship plays a role in the worship of God for Paul, there are times where the risen Jesus is also included in a worship context where he becomes the object of worship. The ultimate, universal, and eschatological worship of God appears to be significantly realized according to Paul through the risen Jesus.

1.4. The Value of the Pauline Letters in Christian Worship as Starting Point Approaching the theme of Christian worship and the place of the risen Jesus from a Pauline perspective is advantageous. Scholarly consensus holds that the Pauline letters are the primary and earliest literary sources for the beginnings and origins of Christianity. In regards to the Pauline literary corpus,34 I am well aware of the arguments in various scholarly circles which differentiate between the “proto-Pauline” letters (Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, 1 Thessalonians and Philemon),35 and the “deutero-Pauline” letters (Ephesians, Colossians, 2 Thessalonians, including the Pastoral Letters: 1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, and Titus). While the issue of the Pauline authorship of various letters attributed to him continues to be debated in scholarship, it is by no means a settled issue, nor is there unanimous agreement on this subject.36 This area regarding Pauline authorship is not the subject of this research study and thus will not be addressed. I will assume in this study that all the Pauline letters are authentic in the Pauline corpus. In short, I will use the entire Pauline corpus indiscriminately in regards to authorship throughout this book. The Pauline letters themselves are valuable in the study of Christian worship and the place of the risen Jesus in worship in that they function as the earliest

8

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

literary windows whereby modern readers can peer into Paul’s first-century worshipping communities. It is possible through these literary windows to observe the language of worship and its various expressions utilized by Paul. The Pauline letters thus remove the roof as it were of the early worshipping Christian communities so that the reader(s) can peer inside and observe the dynamics involved.37 Ralph P. Martin comments that: It seems clear, therefore, that before his mind’s eye, as he wrote, Paul had a picture of the Church assembled for public worship. His introductory greetings and prayers of thanksgiving also point to the same conclusion; and confirm the verdict of modern scholarship that the New Testament literature was composed with services of worship distinctly in view . . . . [T]he reader of the New Testament today is able to enter into the public worship of the early Church because just beneath the surface of the written corpus . . . are the praises, prayers, hymns and confessions of faith of the first believers.38

While Paul remains the earliest source for our study on Christian worship and belief in the risen Jesus, there is also the issue of pre-Pauline source materials that a number of scholars see weaved into Paul’s letters and which are considered earlier still than Paul’s writings. These indirect sources are taken by a number of scholars as “pre-Pauline” sources that Paul received from Christians before him, presumably the earliest followers of Jesus.39 Among these sources are the so-called pre-Pauline confessional formulae,40 passages where the technical language of transmission is utilized by Paul,41 and passages wherein Paul appeals to “Dominical Sayings.”42 This is a question and problem of source criticism. The subject and problem of pre-Pauline sources continue to be a debatable issue in scholarship and need not concern or detain us in this study and will not be treated. I am interested in treating the present Pauline texts that we have before us at our disposal. It is my position throughout this study that whatever Paul himself affirms in his letters regarding worship and the risen Jesus, he in effect endorses irrespective of its origin. This study concurs with the words of Gordon Fee: “What Paul dictates he takes ownership of, even if it had prior existence elsewhere.”43 I will treat the materials of worship in their immediate Pauline contexts and see how Paul himself appropriated them and what the various words employed to communicate worship meant to Paul. The thrust and emphasis of this study will therefore be placed on the Pauline perspective on the issue of worship, and the role of the risen Jesus in the worship context of the Pauline churches. In order to fully proceed in this study, it is necessary to first turn our attention to the problem of the definition of worship. After doing this, I will enter into a discussion regarding the paradigm of worship.

CHAPTER TWO

The Problem of Defining Worship

One of the difficulties and problems in canvassing the theme of worship in the Pauline letters is the paucity of complete descriptions of the worship setting in the Pauline communities. This may be due to the literary genre of Paul’s writings as “letters” or “epistles” that makes it difficult to arrange the materials related to worship into a structured schema.1 Paul did not write or compose worship manuals or an order of service as we know them today in modern ecclesiastical circles. There was no clear and set order of service in Paul.2 Christian worship in terms of an order of service developed later and came to take a more substantial and formative structure by the end of the second century CE.3 References to worship in the Pauline letters are rather scattered and at times fragmentary as we shall see. The difficulty is further exacerbated by the problem that there appears to be no formal definition of what worship is in Paul’s letters. I am not suggesting that a study of early Christian worship in Paul is absolutely impossible without a precise definition for worship. I recognize that some scholars view worship along experiential or phenomenological lines.4 This study suggests that a definition for worship would be advantageous to obtain a deeper understanding of what Paul understood and saw as the basic essence and meaning of the relationship between the human and God. It is my conviction that a lucid working definition of worship will contribute to a better understanding of the dynamics and language involved to describe how the early Christian faith community related to God.

10

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

Paul was familiar with worship, and his source and roots of Christian worship as they are found in the Pauline letters are generally recognized as coming from Paul’s religious heritage in Judaism (Gal 1:13–14). The major difference would be the inclusion of the risen Jesus in the worship experience of the Christian community.5 The worship structure of the Pauline communities, according to a number of scholars, was most likely modeled around the synagogue liturgy,6 although some elements of synagogue influence on the early Christian communities have been challenged by John A. Smith.7 Some of the major scholars who have been key exponents of early Christian worship and who are representative of the field of early Christian worship are Oscar Cullmann (1953),8 C. F. D. Moule (1961),9 D. Gerhard Delling (1962),10 Ralph P. Martin (1964),11 Ferdinand Hahn (1973),12 and David E. Aune (1992).13 We will survey their respective positions on the subject of worship and assess them based on the criteria which they present. While other scholars have written on the subject of early Christian worship, we will focus mainly on those which we have listed.14 We will begin by first providing a skeletal sketch of each of the works noted in this analysis and then proceed to examine these works critically. It will be observed that in all of the works on worship by these scholars, they have approached the subject of worship from a broad perspective in that they have used the entire NT. In this study as already noted, I have decided to deal particularly with the subject of worship in Paul, and thus the scope of our research will be narrower. The purpose for the analyses of these scholars is to examine their definition of worship and see whether the definition is suitable or needs further elaboration. I will also briefly mention in conclusion the views of three contemporary scholars on early Christian worship: Larry Hurtado, Jerome Neyrey, and Richard Bauckham, and set forth the present status of scholarly study on worship.

2.1. Oscar Cullmann We begin first with Oscar Cullmann in his work Early Christian Worship.15 Cullmann divides his book into two main parts. The first part deals with the characteristics of the early Christian worship where he examines the sources, provenance, time, the aims, and the relationship between various elements in worship such as the service of the Word and the Lord’s Supper. He also deals with the spiritual experience in worship and the binding character of the liturgy, followed by the Christian character of the service of worship.16 In the second part, Cullmann turns his attention specifically to the subject of the Gospel of John and early Christian worship themes that are latent in the description of Jesus and his ministry. This section is a breakdown of selected passages from the Fourth Gospel

THE PROBLEM OF DEFINING WORSHIP

| 11

where Cullmann observes themes of worship and expounds on them.17 Cullmann’s approach to Christian worship is also situated in his assumptions about the worship of Israel in the Old Testament18 as well as Jewish practices. In this respect, Cullmann’s approach appears to be one of a comparative analysis between Christian worship and Jewish worship in the OT while showing the development of the former from the latter. In his study, Cullmann begins by examining what he terms the “basic characteristics of the early Christian service of worship.”19 Cullmann presumes that there was such a thing as a “service of worship” in the early Christian movement, but this does not appear to be substantiated by the evidence. What Cullmann intends by this expression “service of worship” is that the early Christian movement had a structured order of worship in which a protocol was followed. In this respect, Cullmann seems to envision the early Christian worshipping community as having a structured and set schedule for worship in the same way modern ecclesiastical institutions have. This appears to be out of place with the time period of the first-century Christian movement. There does not appear to be anything in Paul’s letters that would suggest there was a “service of worship.” Ralph Martin confirms this when he notes that in the first century “no objective description of an early Christian service of worship exists.”20 That there was worship cannot be denied, but to suggest that it was structured like a modernday worship manual is to assert something that the Pauline corpus or the rest of the NT does not say. Cullmann admits: “Our sources for the investigation of the early Christian service of worship do not yield a perfectly clear picture of the outward development of the gatherings for worship; they do disclose, however, a fairly clear tendency in worship.”21 Despite Cullmann’s admission, he nevertheless holds to the idea of a service of worship in the early Christian worshipping community, although we maintain this is not explicitly clear. This is not to be confused with Paul’s call for order in worship (1  Cor 14:40; cf. 14:33). The context of these passages indicate Paul’s concern for avoiding chaos or disorder in the worship gatherings of the church, and not with a structured order or service of worship. Paul is calling rather on the Corinthian believers to be orderly in their worship assembly. An example of Cullmann’s idea that there was a “service of worship” is seen in his assertion that “one day was specifically marked out as the day for the Church services—the Lord’s Day.”22 This, however, is not explicitly the case. When the NT texts are assessed, they appear to show fluidity in the meeting and worship practices of the church whenever they “came together.”23 It is possible that Cullmann may be reading Patristic sources back into the NT at this point.24 Another example is Cullmann’s assertion that “as a rule there was no gathering of the community without the breaking of bread [the Eucharist] . . . The Lord’s Supper is thus the basis and goal

12

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

of every gathering.”25 This also is not explicitly stated in Paul or the NT. This appears to be a retrospective reading of the NT sources in the light of twentiethcentury Christian liturgical worship practice. Aune confirms this about Cullmann’s assertion when he notes that “such a claim clearly goes beyond the evidence.”26 This point has also been noted by Martin, who maintains that a number of scholars are not persuaded by Cullmann’s position in this regard because “this really goes beyond the evidence at our disposal.”27 While Cullmann has brought forward important contributions to the area of early Christian worship, there remains nevertheless an absence of a comprehensive proper working definition for worship. There is no set of criteria that helps to define and identify worship. This may not have been a specific area of interest for Cullmann as his work seems to be generally concerned with a descriptive analysis of Christian worship. In the absence of such a definition and criteria for worship, one can easily assume that worship in the NT texts is much like modern ecclesiastical forms. Cullmann offers no treatment of any of the words that are employed for worship such as latreu,w, proskune,w, or seba,zomai. While Cullmann’s work has been a valuable resource in the area of early Christian worship, it is our conviction that we can take this subject further by probing deeper into the words and expressions used of worship. Another important work by Cullmann which is related to one aspect of worship is his Prayer in the New Testament.28 In this important work, Cullmann presents a comprehensive treatment of prayer by examining the wider text of the NT. He breaks down his study into three parts each of which is broken down into chapters. In the first part, he addresses the matter of difficulties in praying and objections to prayer.29 In the second part, which comprises the bulk of Cullmann’s treatment, he investigates what the NT says about prayer by examining the Synoptic Gospels (with special attention given to the Pater Noster: “Our Father”), the Pauline corpus, the Gospel of John, and other texts such as Acts, 1 Peter, James, Hebrews, and Revelation.30 In part three, Cullmann ends his study with a theological treatment of the answer the NT gives to present questions on the subject of prayer after which he briefly concludes his book.31 Cullmann provides an important contribution to prayer and its dynamics. His section on prayer in the Pauline corpus is helpful.32 Prayer is only one aspect in the broader spectrum of worship that we will also examine. The English word prayer like worship has the tendency to hide the significant nuances of various Greek words used in the NT and by Paul in particular to express the phenomena of communication with God. This is acknowledged by Cullmann where he lists a few of these words,33 but he does not develop this point further. We wish to take this point forward in our study.

THE PROBLEM OF DEFINING WORSHIP

| 13

2.2. C. F. D. Moule C. F. D. Moule addresses the issue of worship in his work, Worship in the New Testament.34 Moule divides his book into five sections. He begins with a very brief prologue.35 In the first section, Moule begins by examining the origins of Christian worship in Judaism.36 He also investigates the place of the synagogue and temple in Jewish worship and investigates its ties to Christian worship. Moule sees this “Jewish matrix” as the place to begin “for the sake both of comparison and contrast.”37 In the second section of his book, he addresses specifically the fellowship meal and it development, which is essentially a study on the Eucharist and its development including the use of the homily and the Scripture.38 In the third section, he addresses the use of baptism and its relation to Christian worship.39 In section 4, Moule proceeds to address the subject of what he calls “other types of worship,”40 which includes the use of prophecy, intercessions, readings and teachings, homilies, hymns, and postures for worship such as kneeling, prostrating, bowing and standing.41 In the fifth section, Moule addresses the language of worship such as the use of “amen,” “abba,” “maranatha,” “hallelujah,” invocation, praise, prayer formulae such a “through Jesus Christ,” petition in the name of Christ, the Lord’s Prayer. He also makes reference to the words proskune,w, latreu,w, and latrei,a.42 Moule then ends with an epilogue.43 Moule like Cullmann begins his work without offering any clear working definition for worship, or criteria for defining worship. He begins by addressing the origin of Christian worship in Judaism.44 When Moule does offer a definition for worship, it is presented much later in his book. Moule gives the following definition for worship: “Worship is work . . . all work done and all life lived for God’s sake is, in essence, worship.”45 We note here that this definition for worship is very broad and general while at the same time very vague. It does not define worship but explains worship very loosely. The purpose of the book is described by Moule as follows: “An attempt is made, therefore, within the limits of this small book, to provide a sober presentation of the evidence for Christian corporate worship.”46 Moreover, Moule notes that the purpose of his work is not to pursue the subject of individual private worship, but only corporate worship. Thus the thrust of Moule’s work in this book is on communal or corporate worship. Moule’s emphasis on the corporate nature of worship, however, tends to diminish and truncate worship, as it can also be individualistic and private as we shall see.47 Moule dedicates a chapter on the language of worship and he does address various expressions used in worship, such as prayer, and hymns.48 Moule comments on the use of words such as proskune,w, latreu,w, and latrei,a49 but says very little about these words and their meanings. The bulk of Moule’s work seems

14

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

concentrated on the use of the sacraments and various elements within Christian worship, which is helpful.

2.3. D. Gerhard Delling Gerhard Delling produced a work on early Christian worship entitled Worship in the New Testament.50 Delling divides his book into twelve chapters. He begins with the problem of the subject of worship in the NT and then deals in the first chapter with the matter of differentiation in terms of the relation of early Christianity to Judaism.51 He then addresses the meaning of worship, particularly with an emphasis on the presence of Christ in the worshipping community and the centrality of Christ so that this chapter takes on a christological theme.52 In the third chapter, Delling examines the pneumatological nature in Christian worship by treating the subject of the operations of the Spirit in the worshipping community such as prophecy, tongues (glossolalia) and other related spiritual gifts.53 In the fourth chapter, the subject of structure in worship is examined which includes prayers, the celebration of the Lord’s Supper, prayer, thanksgiving, and hymns.54 In the fifth chapter, Delling deals with fixed forms in worship that he identifies as the triadic formula (Father, Son, Spirit) and which he expands into a Trinitarian discussion. He also deals with short creeds or formula, doxology, the “maranatha” prayer, the use of “amen” and “abba.”55 In chapter 6, Delling addresses the subject of creed and hymn at further length.56 In the seventh chapter, he goes on to address the place of the Word (Scripture) in Christian worship,57 followed in chapter 8 with a fuller treatment on prayer,58 and then in the ninth chapter with an examination of ceremonial acts in worship with attention being given to both baptism and the Lord’s Supper. He also addresses the practice of “laying on of hands.”59 In chapter 10, Delling addresses the ministries in the Christian church including offices (bishops and deacons), questions of leadership and their appointments, and the role of apostles and prophets.60 In the eleventh chapter, the subject of framework in worship is addressed. Delling treats the gatherings of the primitive church at the temple, house churches, at synagogue worship, meeting on Sunday to break bread (Acts 20:7), the retention of the Sabbath and Jewish feast days by Jewish Christians, the use of the “holy kiss,” and the binding ties forged by the celebration of the Eucharist.61 Delling concludes the twelfth chapter by dealing with the community of faith. He deals with the social life of the community, the separation of Christianity from Judaism and its opposition to it, the conception of the church as a body, the use of confession in baptism, and the unity of the church.62 Delling also adds an appendix where he deals briefly with the Dionysian ecstasy and his comparison with the “ecstatic phenomena in primitive Christianity,” especially as it relates to glossolalia.63

THE PROBLEM OF DEFINING WORSHIP

| 15

Delling provides a definition for worship which is as follows: “Worship is the self-portal of religion. In Worship the sources by which religion lives are made visible, its expectations and hopes are expressed, and the forces which sustain it are made known.”64 This definition in our estimation is very broad and vague and appears more philosophical than it does theological. Delling goes on to explain what the purpose of his book is: “It follows, therefore, that in our study we shall be chiefly dealing with what the congregation does in Worship . . . Worship . . . is in its essence the self-portrayal of the congregation.”65 Delling like Moule appears more interested in presenting in his work the actions of the corporate Christian faith community in worship. Delling’s approach to worship is thus a descriptive one, based on the actions carried out in the worship setting of the faith community. As we noted with Moule, Delling tends to diminish worship to a corporate level in his study. There is also a personal, individualistic element to worship. Delling also states: “The communal character, as will clearly be seen, is a pronounced peculiarity of Christian Worship.”66 The “communal character” of early Christian worship, however, was not unique in itself. The worship of the Jewish synagogue and the temple also had a “communal character” to it as Moule recognizes,67 and the Christian communal character in worship evolved out of the Jewish matrix.68 Delling later admits: “In Judaism religious fellowship is considerably more firmly established.”69 However, we are still left with the problem of what is worship? What is the criteria that determines what worship is? Delling, like Cullmann, attempts to investigate the question of an order or service in early Christian worship. Delling is much more cautious than Cullmann, and states that a picture of a service or order of worship in the early Christian church can be apprehended “only by cautious inferences.”70 Delling still attempts to show that there was probably an order of service in Paul’s letters.71 He also assumes like Cullmann, that the Eucharist or “Lord’s Supper is celebrated on Sunday.”72 While this is clearly and explicitly attested in later Patrisitc sources,73 this is not explicitly stated in the NT. In this respect, Delling, like Cullmann, apprears to be arguing for something which is out of place with the first century Christian movement. In regards to words used for worship, Delling mentions the word proskune,w and makes a number of important points that help elucidate the meaning of worship.74 Delling notes that proskune,w has the idea of showing reverence and respect75 and that it has both human and divine referents.76 He also shows that proskune,w denotes “entire dependence on the Mightier One.”77 Delling also brings out the point that proskune,w presumes an action in the presence of one greater than oneself when he states that it “means only an attestation of reverence in the presence of the Powerful and the Mighty One.”78 While Delling is correct, we point out that this is not the “only” meaning of proskune,w. This word can also include the idea of submission or dependence, obeisance, and the act of

16

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

prostration.79 Delling seems to recognize this as he also states that proskune,w shows “submission and unconditional acknowledgment.”80 Delling does bring this vitally important feature of proskune,w to the forefront and touches on the subject of the relationship between the worshipper and God, but only tangentially. Delling says very little about proskune,w and does not expand further on this important word. Delling concludes his book by making this statement: “Worship is an eschatological function of the Church; it is, in its very essence, the continuing decisive workingout of salvation history, which ends in the eternal adoration of God.”81 Here we note that nothing is said about the definition of worship itself but rather, what the theological function of worship is in the church. Delling therefore presents more of a modern theological and ecclesiastical view of worship. It is our intention to expand further in this area of the definition of worship and thereby help clarify the theological implications for worship like the ones Delling has presented. If worship is not clearly defined, then a theological work on worship would ultimately result in ambiguity.

2.4. Ralph P. Martin Ralph Martin addresses the subject of Christian worship in his book Worship in the Early Church82 and also in his section on worship, which he contributed to in the Dictionary of Paul and His Letters.83 We will make reference principally to these two works by Martin, although Martin has written extensively in the area of early Christian worship.84 In the first work, Worship in the Early Church, Martin divides his book into twelve chapters. He begins his first chapter with an introduction to the church as a worshipping community, also including some theological remarks in regards to worship.85 In the second chapter, he addresses the background of Christian worship in its Jewish inheritance connected to the temple and synagogue.86 In the third chapter, Martin treats the subject of prayers and praises in the NT but mostly focuses on its presence in the corporate or communal worshipping community, including other words used in prayer such as the “amen.”87 In the fourth chapter, hymns and spiritual songs are examined, including hymn fragments found within various texts of the NT.88 In chapter 5, Martin investigates the use of early creeds and confessions of faith89 followed by a study of the “ministry of the word” or the reading and exposition of Scripture in the worshipping community in chapter 6.90 In chapter 7, Martin proceeds to address the subject of Christian stewardship, particularly in terms of the collection of money but also the menace of money when it misused for greedy purposes.91 In chapters 8 to 9, Martin takes up the subject of baptism, first in its place in the teaching of Jesus and, secondly,

THE PROBLEM OF DEFINING WORSHIP

| 17

the apostolic practice of baptism.92 In chapters 10 to 11, Martin next deals with the Lord’s Supper, first in reference to its background and significance, and, secondly, its celebration in the early church with special attention given to Paul’s view of the Lord’s Supper.93 Martin concludes his book in the twelfth chapter by investigating what he sees as the features of early Christian worship in which he sums up the findings of his preceding chapters. Martin then treats the developments of Christian worship in the second century and uses the Didache as an example.94 In Martin’s entry on “worship” in the Dictionary of Paul and his Letters, he breaks his article into three main headings, namely, background, contemporary setting, and Pauline teaching regarding worship.95 Under these headings, Martin provides some related subheadings. In respect to background, Martin deals with the question of the definition of worship and the “pivotal role assigned to Jesus Christ” in the worshipping community.96 In his examination of the contemporary setting, he first deals with Greco-Roman religion and cult and then Jewish practices, which includes the temple, the home, and the synagogue. Martin also deals with synagogue worship, and he mentions praise, instruction, singing, and the observance of holy days. He draws parallels between Jewish worship practices and those of the early Christian movement while showing development in Christian worship.97 Martin then treats the heading of Pauline teaching on Christian worship. Here Martin tries to show some of the dynamics of worship in the Pauline communities such as prayer and thanksgiving. He also deals with various expressions and such as the maranatha prayer, invocation, triadic forms of prayer, praise, and confession. Martin also addresses the issue of hymns and creeds and then moves on to address the subjects of baptism and the Lord’s Supper.98 A section on Paul’s use of corrective measures in his churches is also treated, including Paul’s distinctives, especially as it relates to his eschatological view of the two ages (now / not yet), the place of Christ as the first fruits in the resurrection, and the proleptic nature of the resurrection of believers, the place of the Spirit in the Christian community, and Paul’s emphasis on the edification of the faith community.99 Martin provides in his earlier book a definition of worship, but it is an English definition based on the Anglo-Saxon root word weorthscipe, which developed into worthship and then worship and which carries the meaning of attributing worth to an object.100 Martin, however, moves forward and comments: “If we may elevate this thought [of worship] to the realm of divine-human relationships, we have a working definition of the term worship ready-made for us. To worship God is to ascribe to Him supreme worth, for He alone is worthy.”101 Martin presents a much clearer picture of worship by way of a working definition. He makes an important observation that worship involves a “divine-human” relationship and that it is “the excellent worthiness of God, therefore which makes our worship possible.”102 Martin shows that God is by virtue of his identity worthy to receive our claims of

18

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

worthiness to him. He mentions the worshipper offering God devotion, praise, and prayer,103 but he does not go into detail about these various acts or expressions. Martin mentions the use of proskune,w and its relation to God by the worshipper and how it denotes “submissive lowliness and deep respect.”104 He also mentions latrei,a as “service”105 but says very little on its relation to the theme of worship. Martin then summarizes the terms proskune,w and latrei,a and comments: “From these two Bible terms we learn something of the worshipper’s attitude . . . He is summoned into the presence of the Holy One of Israel; and he responds to this call with an appropriate sense of reverence.”106 Martin makes an important observation about worship involving the entrance of the worshipper into the presence of God. Edith M. Humphrey107 in a recent book on Christian worship has argued that worship involves primarily an entering into the presence of God. The worshipper, according to Humphrey, is privileged and invited to enter into the worship of God along with the angelic host. While Martin addresses the issue of worship in terms of relationship, he does not develop the argument further. He does not deal with the question of what qualifies as true worship, or what criteria should be used to define worship. In Martin’s later work in his entry on worship in Dictionary of Paul and his Letters, he is much clearer on the topic of worship when he states that “there is no formal definition of what the worship of God means or entails in biblical literature.”108 Martin also deals with Pauline teaching on worship.109 He is correct to note that in Paul, “[t]here is no systematized statement of what Paul understood to be a fitting worship practice, nor is there anything resembling a set of rubrics in later service books. Paul’s teaching [on worship] is scattered throughout his correspondence.”110 We are in full agreement with Martin on this point. Martin addresses the use of various expressions of worship in the faith community such as hymns and prayers to name a couple. He goes on to address the subject of the origin of worship when he states that in the biblical texts, “worship originates in the understanding of God as creator and redeemer.”111 We would agree with this position, but it appears to be a very broad and general theological statement to describe worship. We need to go further and define what worship is. Martin provides and contributes invaluable material in the area of early Christian worship by way of its expressions and place in the worshipping community. We feel nevertheless that we can move the argument forward.

2.5. Ferdinand Hahn Ferdinand Hahn addresses the subject of worship in his book The Worship of the Early Church.112 Hahn divides his book into ten chapters. He begins first with the

THE PROBLEM OF DEFINING WORSHIP

| 19

problem of reconstructing a complete picture of Christian worship.113 In chapters 2 and 3, he deals with the subject of worship first in regards to worship in the OT and Judaism, and secondly in regards to the attitude of Jesus to worship.114 In chapters 4 to 7, Hahn addresses the subject of Christian worship first in terms of the foundations of early Christian worship, followed by the worship of the early Aramaic-speaking community, then the worship of Hellenistic Jewish Christianity, and then the worship of early Gentile Christianity.115 In chapters 8 and 9, Hahn moves into the Patristic period and addresses first the subject of worship in the sub-Apostolic period followed by a brief examination of worship in the Apostolic Fathers and Justin Martyr.116 Hahn briefly concludes in chapter 10 and summarizes a few points such as the assembling of the Christian community on the basis of God’s eschatological saving act in Christ. Hahn views worship as edifying the faith community and giving it a “missionary function” to the world at large. He stresses that Christian worship centers on the fulfillment found in Christ in God’s purposes and the operation of the Spirit in the Christian community. Finally, Hahn argues, worship is dominated by God’s eschatological gift of salvation.117 Hahn immediately recognizes from the start that there is no discernible service or order of worship in the NT and that the first time we encounter such an order of service, it is in the middle of the second century. The NT texts according to Hahn are “extremely fragmentary” in this area and “[t] here is no trace of any obligatory liturgical order.”118 He urges that there was rather “great freedom and variety in the structuring of worship.”119 Hahn thus acknowledges: “The study of worship in the period of primitive Christianity therefore confronts numerous difficulties.”120 Hahn notes that there are individual elements which can be derived from the worship of the primitive Christian faith community.121 He does not provide a working definition for worship in his book. He does refer to some of the words used of worship such as latrei,a, but he defines this term as referring to “Jewish worship” and comments that the verb latreu,w is not limited to worship.122 Hahn says very little about these words in the NT, and he does not deal extensively with the meaning of these words as they relate to the theme of worship. The words latrei,a and latreu,w are not used only of “Jewish worship” but are also used of Greco-Roman worship as well.123 While Hahn claims latreu,w is not limited to worship, the standard lexical works argue that latreu,w is usually used in a cultic context.124 It is interesting that instead of dealing with another frequent word for worship in the NT, namely, proskune,w,125 Hahn mentions qrhskei,a but says extremely little about it.126 Hahn does not use any particular criteria to define worship in his book. This makes it difficult to categorize worship in contrast to other forms of service given to, for instance, monarchs, dignitaries, or other human referents. Some of the words used to express a relationship to such referents such as

20

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

proskune,w are also used of service to God. This lack of criteria perhaps led Hahn to make this remark in his concluding chapter: “We cannot simply reach back to the worship of the primitive church.”127 Hahn concludes by offering five points that he believes are “crucial principles of the New Testament understanding of worship,”128 which are as follows: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

The Christian community assembles for worship on the basis of God’s eschatological saving act in Christ. The edifying of the church takes place in worship. Christian worship does not take place in a separate realm but in the midst of the existing world. Worship can be properly ordered only when freedom necessary for the operation of the Spirit remains. Christian worship is dominated by God’s eschatological gift of salvation.

While Hahn makes important claims about worship here, these points are more descriptive of worship than they are definitional.

2.6. David E. Aune David Aune deals with the subject of Christian worship in his entry in The Anchor Bible Dictionary.129 Aune breaks down his article into nine parts with some of them having subheadings. He begins with the problem of method where he comments on the difficulty of attempting to reconstruct Christian worship in the early Christian community. He then deals in section 2 to 3 with the form or “morphology” of Christian worship and looks at some of the defining elements that characterized the early Christian community such as the use of family language for the household of faith. Aune then proceeds to deal with the subject of liturgical sequences where he addresses the order of worship in 1 Corinthians, and then he examines reconstructed liturgical sequences in the NT letters. Aune then addresses some Patristic sources such as the Didache and Justin Martyr. He also deals with the Roman writer Pliny in respect to Christian worship. In the fourth section, Aune investigates the origins of Christian worship by looking at Judaism and Hellenism. He then goes into the fifth section where he examines the nature of the Christian assemblies followed in the sixth section with days for worship. In the seventh section, Aune looks into the language of worship, which includes prayers, creeds and confessions, doxologies, hymns, prophecy, and sermons or homilies. In the eighth section, he examines the place of Scripture reading in worship and concludes in the ninth section with the subject of sacred rituals in which he includes the Eucharist, baptism, and lesser ritual actions such as bowing, prostrating, and the kiss of peace.

THE PROBLEM OF DEFINING WORSHIP

| 21

Aune begins his entry by showing the differences early Christianity had in worship in comparison with other religions in the Roman world. Aune argues that early Christianity had “a primarily verbal character” to it, making it similar to the Jewish synagogue with which it had historical ties.130 Aune makes a number of assertions regarding early Christian worship that are not explicitly stated in the NT. Like Cullmann,131 Aune asserts that “Christian worship occurred primarily on Sunday.”132 While this can be implicitly stated, it is not explicit, and is not so until at least the Patristic writers. He later admits that: “[o]ne of the most pervasive practices of early Christians was their assembling at various times for various purposes.”133 Aune does not give a working definition of worship but rather provides a descriptive picture of worship as follows: “Christian worship can be understood as the reverent homage paid to God and Christ in the context of a Christian assembly.”134 While this statement explains worship on the basis of “reverent homage” to God and Christ, it still remains very broad and vague. What defines “reverent homage”? Can reverent homage be given to a monarch, and if so, what distinguishes that act towards a monarch with that of God? If reverent homage is given within “the context of a Christian assembly,” can such reverent homage also be given to God apart from the Christian assembly? In other words, can reverent homage also be given privately to God and Christ rather than corporately? Aune makes an important observation about context when he states that “the context in which [religious services] are set means they are part of the constellation of activities which constitutes Christian worship.”135 He also makes an important point regarding the use of “religious services” or “religious activities” in worship by the subject towards the object. Here Aune connects religious services within a context that defines them as activities, or actions, whereby Christian worship occurs. In this respect, he has provided an important progress of the relationship between context and worship, and how religious services form the contextual grounds wherein worship is realized and takes place. While Aune makes this extremely important observation, he does not build further on it, but proceeds to address as the focus of his whole article: “the religious activities which characterized Christian assemblies.”136 Rather than addressing the religious activities which characterized Christian worship, Aune deals mainly with the Christian assemblies and their characteristics in their use of religious service. Aune also makes the following important observations regarding the “phenomenological characteristics” of worship. He argues that “worship is relational,” that it expresses “superiority of the focus of worship [the object] to the worshipper,” that “the object of worship inspires awe,” and that “worship involves praise directed to the focus of worship.”137 These characteristics of worship were also observed and argued by Rudolph Otto in Das Heilige (1917).138 Otto contributed significantly to the study of worship by highlighting important features of the relational aspect

22

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

found in worship between the human creature and the deity. Otto refers to the “numinous” as the holy (i.e., God), which imposes upon the human creature the sense of overwhelming awe and fear. He also notes that the finite self-awareness of the human creature in relation to the numinous creates a deep sense of dependency. The numinous becomes an external objective reality to the human creature while at the same time being ontologically different as the “wholly other.”139 Otto summed up these experiences with the numinous as the mysterium tremendum.140 Aune has expanded the definition of worship beyond Cullmann, Moule, Delling, Martin, and Hahn. He has shown that the context of worship involves a relational aspect. Moreover, he shows that in the context of that relationship, there is an uneven scale in which the subject is inferior to the object and that a dependence of the former on the latter is present. This dependence is seen in the fact that the object of worship inspires awe. This sense of awe, as Otto noted, is based on the superiority in status that the object of worship has over the subject who worships. As a result of the awe in the object of worship, an act or expression is communicated by the subject in this case. Aune calls it “praise,” which is directed to the object of worship. This expression is meant to render honor and respect while at the same time reinforce the distinction between the subject and object in worship. He also makes the important connection between Christian worship and the relation of the risen Jesus to it. Aune makes a very important observation when he notes that “the role of Christ in defining God is an essential and distinctive feature of Christian worship.”141 Aune has helped to clarify worship and has moved the discussion forward. He also recognizes the important role the risen Jesus plays in Christian worship and that this is “essential” and a “distinctive feature” in Christian worship. While Aune speaks of the “phenomenological characteristics”142 of worship, he does not specifically define worship. To speak of such phenomenological characteristics of worship without a clear definition of worship is incomplete in our opinion. He agrees that “[t]here has been a marked tendency to read early, fragmentary evidence anachronistically in the light of later, more detailed accounts of Christian liturgical practices.”143 Aune calls this a major methodological problem in the study of early Christian worship because he acknowledges that the early sources are “exceedingly incomplete and fragmentary” and that a structured order of service or worship is not alluded to until the end of the second century CE.144 Hahn has also recognized this point.145 With Paul, Aune recognizes that “a detailed description of the structure and activities of worship was not his main purpose.”146 However, Aune later claims that Paul’s letters and other NT letters “may have been intentionally designed to fit into an order of service through incorporating a variety of liturgical forms and sequences.”147 That Paul intended this is possible, but not certain. Such certainty seems to come in the later Patristic writings.

THE PROBLEM OF DEFINING WORSHIP

| 23

Aune also deals with the language of worship and addresses the various expressions of worship such as prayers, creeds and confessions, doxologies, hymns, prophecy, and sermons or homilies.148 In this section, while Aune does deal with the word proskune,w,149 he does not engage any of the other biblical words related to worship such as latreu,w, seba,zomai, qrhskei,a, and douleu,w. He makes the important observation that the term proskune,w indicates “subjection or subservience” and that there is a “superior/inferior status expressed” and moreover, “bowing gives behavioral expression to the experience of religious awe.”150 In dealing with proskune,w, Aune does not explain that this term can also be used of human rulers or monarchs and that it need not imply worship in a religious sense. The act of proskune,w can be given to both God and humans, but its meaning in regards to worship is dependent on the context. Aune for instance asserts regarding the use of proskune,w that “in every instance but Rev 3:9, cultic worship is in view.”151 In Rev 3:9, proskune,w is applied to human beings (Christian believers) where the risen Christ states, ivdou. poih,sw auvtou.j i[na h[xousin kai. proskunh,sousin evnw,pion tw/n podw/n sou kai. gnw/sin o[ti evgw. hvga,phsa, se / “I will make them come and bow down before your feet, and they will know that I have loved you.” The KJV and ASV renders proskunh,sousin evnw,pion tw/n podw/n as “worship before thy feet.”152 Here the risen Jesus promises that the opponents of the Christians of Philadelphia will come and bow down (proskunh,sousin) at their feet. How can one determine if proskune,w in Rev 3:9 does not have cultic worship in view? We suggest that a proper definition and criteria for worship should first be established. How does proskune,w to God differ from that given to Christian believers in Rev 3:9? We suggest that in the absence of any criteria for determining this important distinction confusion inevitably results.

2.7. Conclusion and the Way Forward In this brief analysis, we have surveyed the views of Cullmann, Moule, Delling, Martin, Hahn, and Aune on the subject of early Christian worship. These scholars have made tremendous contributions in the scholarly field as key exponents in the area of early Christian worship. They all recognized the importance of observing the practical expressions that were used in a worship context, such as prayers, hymns, creeds, baptism, and the Eucharist. Aune summarizes these practical expressions in worship as having a “primarily verbal character” to them.153 Cullmann regarded these practical expressions as constitutive of the spiritual experience of the early Christians. Others like Moule, Martin, Hahn, and Aune investigated the relationship between early Christian worship and Judaism, especially with the worship of the synagogue. With the exception of Cullmann, these scholars also

24

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

treated some of the words for “worship” and discussed their relevance albeit briefly. Moule, Hahn, and Aune also discussed the importance of understanding worship in the context of a corporate communal gathering. Martin and Aune both brought forward the important issue of the difficulty of finding a formal definition of worship in the biblical texts as the early sources tend to be incomplete and fragmentary. Delling and Aune have emphasized the importance of the place of the risen Jesus in Christian worship which Aune sees as a distinctive feature of Christian worship. Aune made the very important observation of the subject-object relationship in the worship paradigm, and the importance of the context in which Christian worship appears, indicating a relation between the two. Aune also highlighted the importance of worship being relational. He described this relationship as homage being paid to both God and Christ in the faith community. Here Aune has included the risen Jesus as an object of homage within Christian worship, a theme that in our estimation is important for assessing early Christian worship. Another important point Aune has advanced is the application of the use of family language in reference to the corporate faith community. This highlights the relational aspect of the faith community, while at the same time evoking themes of dependence and honor towards God. The approach taken by the scholars surveyed above on the study of worship was a broad one in that they canvassed the entire NT in their studies. Some of these scholars were assessing the data of worship found within the NT against the backdrop of OT worship contexts. In this respect, their treatment of worship in the NT became a comparative and evolutionary analysis with that of the OT context. Some of these scholars did put forward a definition for worship. In the examination of their respective approaches to the area of early Christian worship, I noted that a clear working definition and criteria of worship was still not clear. There is a tendency to explain or describe worship rather than define it. I concur with the assessment of Jerome Neyrey that “[m]ost biblical scholars interested in this topic tend to describe worship, not define it. They favor itemizing its elements.”154 Other scholars have omitted any definition in their treatment of worship but have focused instead on its development in the faith community.155 While these scholars have advanced important ingredients regarding early Christian worship, they differed in their approach to the subject. I feel that they were not considering all the ingredients of worship. They have the right pieces for the mosaic of worship, but the whole picture of worship, in my opinion, is still missing other pieces. At times their approaches are very general, and others bring assumptions into the NT texts that do not in my estimation appear to be substantiated. It was noted as well that there was little engagement of the actual words used for worship. When such words are examined, they tend to be treated very briefly with no substantial commentary or expansion on their meaning and place within the context

THE PROBLEM OF DEFINING WORSHIP

| 25

of worship. In addition to these observations, while a study of corporate worship is important, there is also a need to fully investigate worship in its personal or individualistic dimension. In this respect, worship can be both personal and communal. The various biblical words used to express worship are important to investigate at a deeper level and on an individual basis, as words function as definitional guidelines. All the biblical words used to express worship cumulatively make a unique and collective contribution to a comprehensive understanding of the subject of worship. The difficulty may lie in the fact that there is no one word for the concept or idea of “worship” in the language of the biblical text, but rather a collection of words and different aspects to communicate this notion.156 The English word worship is a standard term that communicates a univocal meaning. In contrast, the biblical words that denote or express “worship” are multivalent in their meaning. New Testament “worship” appears to be rather a comprehensive description of the basic religious relationship of the human subject to the divine worshipped object, communicated by a series of various words. In this respect worship is like a mosaic made up of a series of constituent pieces. Neyrey has rightly called for caution in terms of defining worship, particularly in the NT from a modernist perspective. The temptation is to interpret and define terms and words of the ancient world through modern lenses of word definitions. Krister Stendahl has equally noted and warned of the tendency of Pauline exegetes to read Paul from a modern perspective by placing him into our contemporary culture instead of his own first-century social-cultural setting.157 It was noted above that both Cullmann158 and Delling159 seemed to have approached first century worship via the lenses of twentieth century liturgical worship practice. Neyrey notes that: “THE MEANING OF WORDS resides in the cultural use of them, not in lexica. Moreover, the greater the chronological distance between the culture of the NT and ours, the more likely the meanings of words will be ‘lost in translation’.”160 The tendency in scholarship as Neyrey notes has led to the problem of the definition of worship being “lost in translation.” Three contemporary scholars who have addressed the issue of early Christian worship are Larry Hurtado,161 Jerome Neyrey,162 and Richard Bauckham.163 We begin first with Larry Hurtado. Hurtado’s work has generally been concerned with the subject of Jesus devotion where the risen Jesus is treated as an object of worship in early Christianity.164 This is an area of interest to us as well and one that we will return to as we proceed through this study. Hurtado recognizes the difficulty in defining worship and comments under the heading of “Worship” in his book: “I am in full agreement on the importance of this question, and fully aware of the flexibility and potential vagueness of the term ‘worship’.”165 He notes elsewhere that: “The English word ‘worship’ and its translation equivalents in koine Greek have a wide range of semantic possibilities. So, when one claims that this or that

26

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

figure is given ‘worship’, it is not always or automatically clear what is meant.”166 Hurtado admits here that there exists a level of ambiguity with the word worship and its Greek translation equivalents in the NT. Hurtado acknowledges the importance of the semantic range of words employed for worship in Paul and elsewhere in the biblical texts. At the same time Hurtado alerts us to the importance of the ambiguity that arises when words for worship are applied to various figures. This demonstrates the necessity to establish a proper context for the various words for worship. Hurtado appears more interested in focusing on the actions of worship as he mentions “specific devotional actions attested in Paul’s letters” and “devotional phenomena” which “are best taken as ‘worship.’”167 Hurtado’s interest does not appear to be on the definition of worship per se, but rather on the descriptions of worship where the risen Jesus plays an integral part in early Christianity. Hurtado admits that actions in and of themselves do not necessarily mean “cultic worship.”168 This is an important point as it demonstrates the need to ground words in context in order to determine their proper meanings. Hurtado sees the corporate liturgical gatherings of early Christians where “devotional phenomena” was practiced as constituting “worship.”169 Hurtado does attempt to provide a definition for worship in his work At the Origins of Christian Worship where he states: “I use the term ‘worship’ to mean the actions of reverence intended to express specifically religious devotion of the sort given to a deity in the cultures or traditions most directly relevant to earliest Christianity.”170 Here Hurtado brings forward important details about worship as “actions of reverence” that express a “specifically religious devotion” which is given “to a deity.” Hurtado shows here that worship involves a level of action and that its nature is specifically religious, and that it is directed toward a divine referent such as a deity. An important point which Hurtado advances forward is the necessity for a religious context in order for worship to be realized and present.171 I concur that worship involves “actions of reverence,” but it involves other elements as well and cannot be reduced to one specific element. Religious devotion, while it can be given to a deity, can also be given to a plurality of deities, possibly to angels according to some scholars (cf. Col 2:18),172 to the Roman emperor, and to representations of the emperor or deities, namely, idols. There is also a need to explain further the relation of the subject (the worshipper) to the object (the worshipped). When we turn to Jerome Neyrey, we see that he approaches the subject of worship from a social-cultural perspective or social science model. Neyrey as we noted above has made the important observation that scholars dealing with the subject of worship tend to describe it rather than define it, and that “there is an ongoing conversation on the topic of worship.”173 This statement by Neyrey shows that in studies on worship this is not a settled issue. There is a need to further canvass this territory. Neyrey, citing Henton Davies,174 sees three elements within worship,

THE PROBLEM OF DEFINING WORSHIP

| 27

namely: (1) the object of worship, (2) the purpose of worship: to honor the deity, and (3) forms of worship: reverent life, piety and liturgy.175 Neyrey presents an important point here in terms of the structure or paradigm of worship. He sees an object of worship as necessary to this paradigm, including forms in which this worship is communicated and the purpose for worship. While this is a significant way forward in my estimation, it can still be expanded further. In this paradigm model, the subject who worships is absent. Another missing ingredient is the level(s) of action between the subject and the object of worship. This is essential to establish the nature of the relationship between the worshipper and the worshipped. Later, however, Neyrey does makes reference to the relationship in worship of the “subordinate to a superior. In the context of worship the superior person is God.”176 This is a very important step forward in dealing with the worship paradigm. Neyrey addresses the question of the definition of worship in his book Give God the Glory under the section “Worship Defined.”177 Neyrey acknowledges that: “Definitions of worship are rare; even many social science dictionaries and encyclopedias do not include one.”178 Neyrey indicates in this comment that the question of properly defining worship seems to be an ongoing one which has still need for further investigation. Neyrey proposes that a definition of worship can be arrived at by using Bruce Malina’s proposed social science model of communication theory for prayer.179 Neyrey adjusts Mailina’s social science model of communication to provide an adequate definition of worship.180 Neyrey, however, goes on to classify worship in terms of communication theory, which he argues can be seen in the prayer model of mortals communicating with God and God speaking to the “Jesus Group” or faith community.181 While Neyrey proceeds to classify worship in terms of various expressions or actions (communication / prayer) he does not seem to arrive at a precise definition for worship. It seems that Neyrey describes worship but does not appear to provide a clear definition for worship. The act of prayer is an important item of worship that illustrates one feature of worship, but is not representative of the whole of worship. This has the tendency to reduce worship to only one element. In Neyrey’s concluding remarks on his section on worship, he states: “We have an adequate model of worship, primarily based on . . . the process of communication . . . . Worship, moreover, expresses the communication of a group of Christian disciples with God.”182 Neyrey is describing the model of worship and its expression primarily in terms of communication with God. I feel we can still proceed further than this with a definition of worship. Lastly, we turn to Richard Bauckham. Bauckham has written extensively on early Christian worship and shares with Hurtado an interest in the worship of Jesus as seen in his bibliographic information. Bauckham’s main argument for the worship of Jesus in early Christianity revolves around his view of the “divine identity” of God, which the early Christians, according to Bauckham, believed

28

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

Jesus shared.183 Bauckham also investigates as a corollary to this question of “divine identity” the relationship between Jewish monotheism in Second Temple Judaism and New Testament Christology.184 It is on the basis of the “divine identity” in distinction to everything else that Bauckham sees the context of worship. Bauckham comments that it is “worship which signaled the distinction between God and every creature, however exalted.”185 He sees descriptions or expressions such as prayers, invocations, doxologies, and hymns as indicative of worship.186 Bauckham does provide a definition of worship as follows: “Worship is the honor paid to the one God, and the one God is the one to whom worship is given.”187 This definition while helpful in showing worship as the paying or rendering of honor to God is, nonetheless, brief and incomplete in my opinion. While the giving of honor is an important aspect in worship, it is still only one component or feature of worship. Worship is not to be reduced to only one element, but to examined in its entirety. In studying worship from a broader perspective, we can avoid reductionism. While worship is to be given to God, as Bauckham rightly notes, it can also be given to entities or things other than God in the biblical texts. There is also the question of the subject-object relationship in worship, and the relationship between these two and what defines them. In light of these findings, it is my intent to make a contribution to the scholarly field by presenting a clear working definition of worship, and in addition, to propose criteria by which we can establish a context for worship. We will also seek to determine what qualifies as true worship and what does not. In this way, I wish to take this research on early Christian worship forward with the important contributions already made by the scholars we have surveyed above. An important clarification regarding this study must be made at this point. It is not my intent to suggest that all scholarly work on early Christian worship is reducible to the definition of worship set out in this study. Moreover, I do not suggest that my definition possesses a superior epistemological vantage point over others or is immune from alteration. Rather, I present this study as a contribution and a way forward in the study of early Christian worship in Paul. It is my hope that this study will only deepen scholarly discussion and investigation and expand our horizons on this vital subject.

CHAPTER THREE

A Proposed Definition and Criteria for Worship

A working definition of worship and criteria that will be employed and referenced in this research work will be the following: Worship is a personal relational religious act of total submission between a human or spiritual1 subject, either individually or collectively in a group, and a superhuman, divine,2 or heavenly, superspiritual entity or entities, God, a god, or gods, including their representation(s) by way of an idol or idols.3 In this religious context, the human (or spiritual) subject is functionally the worshipper, the active subject, the one who performs the act or medium of worship, and God or a superhuman (or spiritual heavenly) entity is functionally the passive object, the worshipped object, the one who receives the act of worship.4 A religious context is axiomatic for worship to take place. If the act is not performed in a religious context, worship does not take place. The two main ingredients in worship that will be examined are those of personal relationship and action. Relationally, the worshipper is considered to be inferior and dependent on God. Thus, the relationship can be expressed as that of a minor subject (the worshipper) to a major object (God). To communicate and express this relationship between the worshipper and the worshipped, the worshipper engages in various actions or levels of action to indicate his or her inferiority to and dependence on God. These levels of action function as the medium between the worshipper and God. Many of these actions are taken in a metaphorical application in that the worshipper exercises these actions as if God were in fact visibly

30

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

and / or symbolically present before him or her as a human magistrate or human monarch would be. These expressions can be visible, audible, inaudible, and verbal. Nevertheless, they are outward expressions of what the worshipper is internally expressing in the heart.5 We will approach the subject of religious worship by using the following criteria as a paradigm for worship throughout this research work. The three necessary elements or criteria in the worship paradigm are as follows: 1. 2. 3.

the subject(s) (human, spiritual) level of action or medium (praise, service, prostration, bowing invocation, prayer) the object(s) (superhuman or superspiritual being or their representations in idols)

Worship is a composite phenomenon that will involve all three elements of the above criteria.6 All three of the above elements come together to form a cumulative whole that is crucial in order to understand worship. The two main approaches to worship in Paul which will be examined in this study will involve that of investigating: 1. 2.

words used by Paul to designate worship expressions and acts referred to in the Pauline letters which describe worship

The words and expressions and acts used by Paul for worship will function in this research work as point 2 of the criteria in the worship paradigm: the level of action or medium through which worship is rendered or realized. We will begin at this juncture by first examining point 3 of my criteria: the object of worship in Paul’s letters and then examine point 1 of the criteria: the subject of worship. This will be followed by exploring the question of the criteria for proper worship. We will then proceed in chapters 4 and 5 to focus mainly on point 2 by investigating first the words or language of worship in Paul, and then the practical expressions of worship in Paul.

3.1. The Object of Worship The status of this present discussion is to determine at this point what constitutes an object of worship, that is, the passive recipient or object which receives the act of worship. Following this we will proceed further to investigate the subject of worship and criteria for worship. We begin this section on the object of worship because it is important to determine what Paul believed about the recipient of worship. Why does God receive worship and why should God receive worship? What

A PROPOSED DEFINITION AND CRITERIA FOR WORSHIP

| 31

is it about the identity of God that makes him or qualifies him to be an object of worship? While the English word worship, as Martin noted, carries the notion of attributing worth to an object,7 the same idea appears to be present in Paul. The recognition and acknowledgment of the worth that is attributed to the object is also an important factor, especially from the perspective of Paul’s social world. The identity of the object can differ here. The object that receives worship can be conceived of, as we noted above, as a superhuman entity, or entities such as God, a god or gods, including humans associated with the divine such as the Roman emperor, thus placing them on a superhuman level.8 The identity of the object is crucial in the case of worship because it is determinative of the honor and the claim of worth that is due to the said object. In the case of worship, however, as I have argued in my criteria the object must be religious, which also creates a religious context. When we speak of honor we must differentiate based on the object. Jerome Neyrey notes that the idea of honor and acknowledgment of such honor plays a central role in worship: “Honor refers to the claim of worth, value, and respect that must be publicly acknowledged.”9 Thus worship is not only attributing worth but also acknowledging that the divine object is indeed worthy and rightfully deserves such honor, and thus, there is a reason why such worth is being attributed in the first place.10 Such an acknowledgment infers a personal relation between the worshipper and the worshipped object. The worshipper views the object of worship as superior to himself. As the servant, the worshipper sees his / her duty as one in which he /she renders what is due to God such as honor, reverence, praise, blessing, and thanks. The identity of the subject can differ as well; it can be a human or even a spiritual being (e.g., an angel), but the relation is still that of an inferior or a minor to a superior or major object. Many of these values such as honor, reverence, praise, blessing, and thanks functioned in the ancient world as synonyms, so these words could function interchangeably.11 Ultimately, the attribution of these values to God was intended to acknowledge and affirm his identity in terms of his characteristics as creator, provider, sustainer, and savior. In this way, God was honored, and in the act of rendering this honor to God, worship is actualized. God is attributed with “worth” and he is summarily acknowledged and recognized as the one worthy to receive such recognition. This seems to be predicated on the view that God is worthy to receive certain virtues because of his identity and status. The honor and worship that is given to God appears to be commensurate with his identity. The honor and worship that is to be given to God is therefore different than that given to others. This indicates by extension that the attribution of certain virtues such as honor, glory, or praise should be commensurate with the object to whom these virtues are attributed.12 In a religious context, the attribution of honor to God is an act of worship.

32

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

The ancient Greek historian Herodotus is an example of one who demonstrates that there are varying degrees of honor which are dependent on the identity of the object who receives such honor. In writing about the customs of the Persians, Herodotus (ca. 484 BCE–425 BCE) writes: evntugca,nontej d’ avllh,loisi evn th/si o`doi/si tw/|de a;n tij diagnoi,h eiv o[moioi, eivsi. oi` suntugca,nontej: avnti. ga.r tou/ prosagoreu,ein avllh,louj file,ousi toi/si sto,,masi: h;n de. h= ou[teroj h=| u`podee,steroj ovli,gw|, ta.j pareia.j file,ontai: h;n de. pollw/| h=| ou[teroj avgenne,steroj, prospi,ptwn proskune,ei to.n e[teron [2] timw/si de. evk pa,ntwn tou.j a;gcista e`wutw/n oivke,ontaj meta, ge e`wutou,j deute,ra de. tou.j deute,rouj: meta. de. kata lo,gon probai,nontej timw/si: h]kista de. tou.j e`wutw/n e`kasta,tw oivkhne,nouj evn timh/| a;gonta,I nomi,zontej e`wutou.j ei=nai avnqrw,pwn makrw/| ta. pa,nta avri,stouj, tou.j de. a;llouj kata. lo,gon th/j avreth/j avnte,cesqai, tou.j de. e`kasta,tw oivke,ontaj avpo. e`woutw/n kaki,stouj ei=nai.. When one man meets another on the road, it is easy to see if the two are equals; for, if they are, they kiss each other on the lips without speaking; if the difference in rank is small, the cheek is kissed; if it is great, the humbler bows and does obeisance to the other. [2] They honor most of all those who live nearest them, next those who are next nearest, and so going ever onwards they assign honor by this rule: those who dwell farthest off they hold least honorable of all; for they think that they are themselves in all regards by far the best of all men, that the rest have only a proportionate claim to merit, until those who live farthest away have least merit of all.13

Herodotus notes here that it is an easy task to determine the identity or rank of a given man, based on the varying degrees of honor that are rendered to him by other men, which is in turn, based on the level of action that is expressed. This appears to agree with the subject-level of action-object of the criteria noted above. However, it is clear from Herodotus that he is not addressing a context of worship, but merely one of honor in a social or political context. The context is not religious here. In order for a worship context to exist, we argued that a religious context must be present. Herodotus, for instance, notes that when a man meets another man of equal status on the road the level of action which is expressed is one of kissing one another (avllh,louj) on the mouth. The act of reciprocity is an equal one between the two being indicated here by the reciprocal pronoun. If, however, the difference in rank of one of the two men is little or small (ovli,gw|) over the other, then the level of action is that of kissing the cheek. However, if the difference is great (pollw/|) between the two, then the inferior, the “humbler” one (avgenne,steroj), performs a level of action whereby he prospi,ptwn proskune,ei to.n e[teron / “bows and does obeisance to the other.” It should be noted here that the greater the difference in rank between the subject and object, the greater the honor, and consequently the greater the level of

A PROPOSED DEFINITION AND CRITERIA FOR WORSHIP

| 33

action which the subject renders to the object. Herodotus reserves the act of bowing and obeisance as the greatest level of action. In the act of bowing and doing obeisance, one physically demonstrates his or her position in relation to the object by lowering oneself closer to the ground, thereby showing his or her inferior status in relation to the superior object and emphasizing the distance between the two. A corollary issue that Herodotus attaches to these levels of actions in the giving of varying degrees of honor is that of the proximity between the subject and object. More honors above all is given to those who live closest to the subjects, and the farther the proximity between the subject and the object, the lesser degree of honor is rendered. Foreigners in this view are seen to have the least honor since they are farthest away in proximity. Since the Persians, according to Herodotus, consider themselves the “best of all men,” then honor is measured based on proximity others have to them. The notion of proximity is an important one as it communicates the idea of relationship. The closer the proximity between the subject and object, the closer the relationship or access will be for the subject to approach the object. We see a parallel here with Paul. Paul also sees the relationship between believers and God in terms of nearness, closeness, and proximity. The word of faith (the gospel) is said to be evggu,j / “near” to believers (Rom 10:8);14 the Lord is also said to be evggu,j / “near” (Phil 4:5)15 in proximity to believers. In Eph 2:13, 17,16 those who were once makra.n / “far off” are now brought evggu.j / “near” by the blood of Christ. Here we note a contrast between two polar opposites: far and near. We also note a difference in distance and proximity: believers were once far and distant from God, but now in Christ they have been brought into close proximity with God because they are in relationship with God. Part of that relationship with God involves rendering honor to him, which becomes an act of worship because in this case the context is a religious one. Paul also believed that honor should be given to those in higher and more honorable positions and thus he also believed honor to be differentiated and distributive. Paul sees this for example in regards to governmental authority and he links the level of action of showing honor to their status and identity.17 The rendering of these virtues appears again to be commensurate with their object or reference point. In Rom 13:7, Paul writes, avpo,dote pa/sin ta.j ovfeila,j tw/| to.n fo,ron to.n fo,ron tw/| to. te,loj to. te,loj tw/| to.n fo,bon to.n fo,bon tw/| th.n timh.n th.n timh,n / “Pay to all what is due them—taxes to whom taxes are due, revenue to whom revenue is due, respect to whom respect is due, honor to whom honor is due” (NRSV). The instruction by Paul to pay to all that is due to the governmental authorities indicates that what was paid by way of taxes or revenue, respect and honor, was commensurate with their identity, in this case with the identity of government authorities.18 The rendering of honor in this case is a social-political one, and hence the context is not religious, and thus worship does not take place.

34

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

This explains Paul’s understanding of honor as differentiated and distributive. In this case, honor can be given to someone other than God, namely, governmental authorities. The context again is determinative to define the level of action, and as we have seen, the context in Rom 13:7 is a social-political one. The reason they can receive such an honor is due to their identity, but ultimately and importantly Paul sees the governmental authorities as deriving their authority (evxousi,a) to rule from God himself, who is the ultimate source of authority (Rom 13:1–6).19 In this respect, their authority is derivative, because it comes from the ultimate source: God. According to Paul all governmental authority exists because of God and has been instituted by God himself (Rom 13:1). Thus, the source of the honor to be given to these authorities in Paul’s mind is established by God. In honoring such authorities, one indirectly honors God himself, for even the governmental authorities are referred to by Paul in Rom 13:4 as qeou/ ga.r dia,kono,j evsti,n / “for he is God’s servant” (RSV). When one honors God’s servant, one honors God who appointed him, and in this respect one can be said to worship God indirectly because one is obeying God in regard to political affairs. John N. Collins has noted that in the Greco-Roman world the dia,kono,j / “servant” referred to someone who functioned as an agent of a high-ranking person in the capacity of an intermediary, messenger, or diplomat.20 As the servant of God the governmental authorities are to receive a degree of honor commensurate with their status and identity, which Paul calls for in Rom 13:7.21 However, as the servant of God, the governmental authorities are also in a personal relationship with God, who confers authority to and on them, and thus the governmental authorities are also in a position to render ultimate and maximal honor and respect to God.22 Paul, like Herodotus, sees honor on a scale of lesser to greater as noted above in his treatment of governmental authorities in a social-political context. Paul also saw honor being rendered in an ecclesiastical context, i.e., between fellow Christians. Paul viewed Christian believers in an egalitarian scale as equals to one another as he affirms that there is no Jew or Greek, no slave or free, no male or female, but that they are one in Christ (Gal 3:28). Paul expands further on this idea of unity in Christ by employing the metaphor of a body in 1 Cor 12:12–27.23 Here Paul uses the collective metaphor of the one body to describe Christ and the various parts of the body to describe Christian believers. Paul balances here the concepts of unity and diversity by using the metaphor of the body as other ancient writers like Seneca (3 BCE–65 CE) did.24 Paul addresses the issue of various parts of the body that are deemed weaker but are in fact indispensable, and those parts deemed less honorable (avtimo,tera) one clothes with greater honor (timh.n; 1 Cor 12:23). These weaker and less honorable members are understood as a reference to those in the faith community who had inferior social status.25 Paul proceeds to argue that God has so arranged the body in tw/| u`steroume,nw| perissote,ran dou.j

A PROPOSED DEFINITION AND CRITERIA FOR WORSHIP

| 35

timh,n / “giving the greater honor to the inferior member” (1 Cor 12:24) with the result being that there should be no schism in the one body, but that all its members may reciprocally have the same care for one another (avllh,lwn; 1 Cor 12:25). Paul shows that this rendering of honor to the inferior member is God’s desire in that God himself has arranged the body in this way. The unity of the many members in the one body is further highlighted by emphasizing that when one member of the body suffers, all the members conjointly suffer (sumpa,scei), and when one member is honored, glorified, or praised (doxa,zetai), all should conjointly rejoice (1 Cor 12:27). When a part is affected, the whole is affected as well.26 In this case, Paul sees honor given to one member of the faith community as being shared by all so that there is a reciprocity of honor among Christian believers. The concept of reciprocity was an important one in the ancient world, which Aristotle highlighted in the context of friendship.27 In the context of friendship, reciprocity was seen as equal as Aristotle notes, e`ka,teroj ou=n filei/ te to. au`tw/| avgaqo,n kai. to. i;son avntapodi,dwsi th/ boulh,sei / “Each party therefore both loves his own good and also makes an equivalent return by wishing the other’s good.”28 The reason for this was due to the notion that equality functioned as an essential element of friendship,29 and the essence of friendship according to Aristotle was community.30 Paul conveyed the essence of community with the word koinwni,a meaning “fellowship,” “association,” or “communion,”31 and this word according to G. Stählin is used in ancient literature with monotony in reference to friendship.32 Paul in effect turns the paradigm of honor of his social-cultural context on its head by affirming that the lesser, inferior, and weaker members in the body deserve greater honor. Paul argues that all the bodily parts have their place in cooperating together for the function of the whole body. Paul sees the honor accorded to God as different in degree from that which is accorded to humans. God deserves ultimate or total honor while all others deserve a derived honor relative to their status. In the Pastoral Letters widows should be shown honor (1 Tim 5:3; tima,w), and elders who labor in preaching and teaching in the church should be given diplh/j timh/j / “double honor” (1 Tim 5:17). One can raise the objection that since the context in 1 Tim 5:3, 17 is a religious one, since it is dealing with relations in the faith community, does this imply that the rendering of honor is worship? We would reply in the negative since this does not meet the requirements based on our definition and criteria for worship. For worship to occur the context must be religious, but the identity of the subject and object are also crucial. The subject must be a human entity (or sometimes a spiritual entity like an angel) and the object must be a divine entity, that is, a superhuman or superspiritual heavenly entity. In the case of 1 Tim 5:3, 17, the objects of honor (widows, elders) are not divine but human, and the writer is calling on believers to show a special honor to those of the same spiritual family along

36

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

horizontal lines. Paul himself enjoins on the Christian community to show honor (timh,) to one another thus making it a reciprocal action among Christian believers (Rom 12:20).33 Parents should also be honored (tima,w) as prescribed by the Decalogue (Eph 6:2; cf. Exod 20:12; Deut 5:16), but the context here is social and familial. In the Pastoral Letters, there is also an understanding that slaves who are under their masters should regard their masters as pa,shj timh/j avxi,ouj / “worthy of all honor” (1 Tim 6:1). The master by virtue of his identity and status in this case has a right to receive honor from his slave. This honor, however, is a social one and not religious. Another important factor relevant to worship in the act of rendering honor is that of submission. In worship, there is total submission to God and his will. As we shall see below, Paul borrows the imagery of sacrifice and applies it to Christian believers to illustrate and communicate their complete and total submission to God (Rom 12:1). The notion of sacrifice itself denotes the idea of total submission in that the victim gives up and surrenders its very life with all its rights and privileges. However, Paul also calls, as we have seen above, for submission (u`pota,ssw)34 to governmental authorities (Rom 13:1, 5; cf. Titus 3:1). Believers are also called to exercise mutual submission to one another out of reverence for Christ (Eph 5:21), and wives are called to submit to their husbands in the Lord (Col 3:18; cf. Eph 5:24). In the Pastoral Letters, slaves are called to submit to their own masters (Titus 2:9). While these examples illustrate submission between two parties, it is nevertheless a relative and partial submission and never a total submission. Submission to God trumps all others in that it is supposed to be absolute, total, and complete submission. One’s allegiance and submission is first and foremost to God, and then secondarily to everyone else. In worship one submits totally and completely to God even to the forfeiture of one’s life.35 When honor that is rightly God’s is given to someone or something else, this amounts to dishonoring God by taking from him what is rightfully his. Since the honor of God is associated with a religious context and where worship takes place, to give honor to anyone other than God in a religious context is understood by Paul to constitute idolatry, which to him is the antithesis of the worship of God (cf. Rom 1:25). If honor to God communicates worship and such honor is given to someone else, this translates into the worship of something else. Thus Paul understands the giving of honor in a nonreligious context to be permissible, but when honor is placed in a religious context with God as its object, it is not permissible according to Paul to give that honor to anyone other than God. The reason for this seems to be based on the context and the identity of the object who receives honor. Another category which Paul perhaps mentions although in passing and indirectly is the honor and respect that should be afforded to the angels. This, however, is not explicit but possibly implicit. In a passage dealing with a worship context in

A PROPOSED DEFINITION AND CRITERIA FOR WORSHIP

| 37

1 Cor 11:2–16, Paul addresses the subject of women veiling their heads when they pray and prophesy, both levels of action which occur in the worship setting of the Christian community (1 Cor 12–14). The subject of women veiling their heads in the worship gathering of the Corinthian church need not detain us as it is not particularly germane to our study. We merely wish to point out that this practice of women veiling (notwithstanding the scholarly debate about what precisely this means) their heads is set within a Christian worship context.36 It is within this worship communal context that Paul’s urges and commands that women veil their heads dia. tou.j avgge,louj  / “because of the angels” (1  Cor 11:10).37 Joseph A. Fitzmyer38 has long argued that the reference to the angels in 1 Cor 11:10 is suggestive of the fact that angels were believed within Second Temple Judaism and early Christianity, to be present during the worshipping communal gathering.39 Paul seems to indicate here that the angels are present among the Corinthian worshippers and that a woman ought to cover head and thereby show respect to authority and not appear unseemly before them (i.e., the angels).40 Since the angels are considered to be themselves under the authority of God, so women should show respect for authority according to Paul by covering their heads. The idea that the angels are present in the Christian worshipping community seems to be at least the most plausible as Fitzmyer has argued.41 Francois Tolmie agrees with Fitzmyer and is correct to note that since Paul mentions the angels in 1 Cor 11:10, in a passage where the context is clearly one of worship, he most likely intends to mean that the angels are present with and in the worshipping community.42 Thus, believers according to Tolmie “worshipped God in the company of the heavenly host.”43 Edith Humphrey also argues that Christian worship primarily involves the privileged invitation of the worshipping community to enter into God’s presence and join with the angelic host in the worship of God.44 The reference therefore in all likelihood has to do with respecting authority, and that this has bearing on the presence of the angels with or among the worshipping community. When the subject honors and acknowledges the object, there is a reaction or a responding action in return from the object back to the subject. In the case of governmental authorities, if the subject honors them, then there is protection and provision and personal and / or familial welfare. When children honor their parents there is provision made for them (food, clothing, housing, and schooling). In each of these cases, there tends to be a party who occupies a position that is higher than the subject (e.g., government-citizen; parent-child; master-slave; church eldersbelievers). The only exception is that when Paul is dealing with Christian believers, he calls them to reciprocate honor for each but on the basis that they are on an equal level (Rom 12:20; cf. Gal 3:28). In each case, with the exception of God, we note that there is something to reciprocate even if one of the parties is greater than the other. In the case of God, however, there is a difference. While honor must be

38

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

given to God, there is also reciprocity. God blesses, protects, guides, and provides for his children or people, but the one exception is that the worshipper can never “out-give” or fully repay God. The worshipper in this respect is always in debt or indebted to God because he or she can never repay God for his blessings and provisions since God can infinitely give and the worshipper is finite in the capacity of his or her offerings.45 Since the worshipper can never “out-give” God, the duty of the worshipper is to repay God by principally honoring him by means of acknowledging him, and this acknowledgment translates into the act of worship itself which is expressed through various levels of action. God does not lack anything and thus is not in need of anything finite creatures can render to him.46 The worshipper in honoring God acknowledges God’s greatness and status as the one worthy of all honor and praise. A modern-day example concerning worship helps to elucidate these points just made. John Piper in the “Acknowledgments” section of his book The Pleasures of God writes: To Jesus Christ I acknowledge infinite indebtness. This is not an attempt to repay. That would be an offence to grace. It is an act of worship. From the time I came into being, I have gone deeper and deeper in debt to Christ, and I will continue to do so forever. Every breath, every heartbeat, every book, every friend puts me another degree deeper in debt to grace. In this I rejoice, because the Giver gets the glory (1 Peter 4:11).47

All the ingredients we mentioned in the element of reciprocity in worship can be seen in Piper’s acknowledgment paragraph. There is the act of acknowledging a debt that is infinite and therefore, cannot be repaid because “the Giver” is implicitly infinite. There is an admission that such an acknowledgment is in no way an attempt to repay, because that would offend God’s grace, which is an unmerited favor that is freely given. Piper sums up the act of acknowledging what he cannot pay to Christ as “an act of worship.” The measure of indebtness increases from birth onwards and continues “forever” so that the human is forever in debt to the divine Giver. The benefits enjoyed and bestowed including every breath, heartbeat, and everything one enjoys in life, one’s accomplishments (“every book”), and friends incrementally places the recipient further into debt. The recipient can never repay these debts nor reciprocate them back to the Giver.48 All the recipient can do is to acknowledge his or her indebtness to the Giver and in this way credit or glory is rendered to the Giver alone, and so in Piper’s words “the Giver gets the glory.” The word “glory” itself, particularly in Hebrew, carries important meaning for our understanding of God’s worth and right to be worshipped. The word dAbK' “glory” is defined as “abundance, honour, glory,” “riches,” “splendour,” “wealth,” “reverence.”49 Holladay also notes that dAbK carries the meaning of “weight, burden,” “distinction,” “respect,” “mark of honor,”50 and Harris, Archer, and Waltke note that the root word dbeK' means “be heavy, grievous, hard, rich, honorable,

A PROPOSED DEFINITION AND CRITERIA FOR WORSHIP

| 39

glorious.”51 The Greek equivalent in the LXX and NT do,xa also carries the meaning of “riches,” “honour,” “glory.”52 The words dAbK and do,xa when used of God53 denotes the idea that God possesses such qualities as honor, which is to say that he is rich and wealthy and therefore, he has an abundance of resources. Due to the possession of these riches, he is heavy with a weight of resources. As a result of such possessions God is to be afforded honor, distinction, and respect. The possession of such riches earns God a mark of honor to those with whom he is in relationship. While these words can be applied to beings other than God, they are used in a limited context, and the context is usually nonreligious.54 When they are used of God they are used in a religious context and spoken of in superlative degrees, and thus they denote worship according to the proposed criteria. When glory is attributed or rendered to God by the worshipper, he or she is not adding to what God already possesses, but rather they are acknowledging God for who he is and for what he has, and in so doing they honor him. Here we observe the three criteria mentioned above. The subject (the worshipper) is in a relationship in which he engages in a religious act which becomes the medium or level of action, in this case “acknowledging” God’s worth and attributing glory to God, the worshipped object. In the examination of the preceding points, we observe that honor can be given to the following: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.

God governmental authorities widows elders in the church parents masters Christian believers angels

We have noted that in Paul there was an understanding of the honor given, and acknowledgment of that honor which was rendered to various objects, whether human governments or God. In the Hellenistic social-cultural world of Paul, there was also an understanding of the honor, reverence, and praise rendered to humans and the gods. There was a differential contrast between humans and the gods. What distinguished them again was the context. When the context is religious, it will be noted that worship occurs. There was a distinction made between honor and worth rendered to a human ruler or magistrate (as we saw in Paul’s treatment of governmental authorities in Rom 13:1–7)55 and the gods. The human ruler and magistrate would in effect be an inferior image of that which God truly was. The Greco-Roman world of Paul seemed to be conscious of the distinction between

40

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

the worth and honor rendered to humans and to the divine. When the lines of demarcation between these two categories, the human and the divine, are blurred or intersected with each other, there is usually a reaction of protest or opposition.56 An example of this in Greco-Roman literature appears in the writing of Arrian who records the following words attributed to the Greek philosopher and historian Callisthenes (ca. 360–328 BCE), But the honors attributed to men have been distinguished from those accorded to the gods in a great many ways . . . But nowhere is the distinction more plainly marked than in the custom of obeisance. For human beings greet one another with a kiss, but divinity, I suppose because it is seated on high and must not be touched, is honored with obeisance and choruses are established for the gods, and paeans are sung to them.57

What is significant in this text is the context of the sharp distinctive categories between men and the gods. Honor can be given to both men and gods, but when it is rendered to the latter, it is distinguishable in “great many ways” or what we might term, degrees. The distinguishing factor again is the context, whether or not it is a religious one. The first is “obeisance” or prostration. Another way the distinction is made is by means of the distance and unapproachability between men and the gods. The distance between the human subject and the divine object is meant to heighten the distinctiveness between the two. This recalls our point that the human worshipper, who is the subject, is inferior and is the minor in relationship to the superior object of worship, who is the major. The relationship is never on an even keel, and thus we can refer to the relationship between the worshipper (subject) and the worshipped (object) as a vertical relationship. Finally, honor is rendered to the gods by obeisance and with music by means of “choruses” and “paeans” or hymns that are sung to the gods. The “great many ways” in this case are obeisance, choruses, and the singing of hymns to the gods, which implies a religious context and hence worship occurs. These expressions of worship in a religious context as we shall see are also present in Paul. Callisthenes makes these statements in light of Alexander the Great’s demand to receive prostration, which was deemed offensive to many of the Greeks; thus Callisthenes also poignantly remarks that: there is no honor which Alexander [the Great] is unworthy to receive, provided that it is consistent with his being human; but men have made distinctions between those honors which are due to men, and those due to gods, in many different ways.58

As with Paul (Rom 13:7) so with Callisthenes, honor can be rendered to human authority, but it is a distinctive honor from that given to the divine object(s). The honor that is rendered to the divine object is appropriate because

A PROPOSED DEFINITION AND CRITERIA FOR WORSHIP

| 41

it acknowledges the status and authority of the divine object, which is above and distinctive to human status and authority. Again, it is the context that is crucial to assess the nature of the levels of action as to whether or not it constitutes worship. This distinctive understanding was accepted in the classical period as we have noted in Greco-Roman writings,59 but it is also understood by Paul. We also noted that a factor involved in the distinctive relationship between the subject and object is the implied heightened concept of distance between the human and the divine. While we discussed in the case of Herodotus above the importance of honor and relationship being based on the concept of nearness to the object that one honors, a concept Paul also is aware of (Rom 10:8; Phil 4:5; cf. Eph 2:13, 17), sometimes the notion of distance between the subject and object was employed in order to heighten the greatness and superlative qualities of the object of honor and worship. For this reason as we shall see in the passages that follow, the notion of distance is usually found in doxologies that function as vehicles of praise where the attribution of greatness to a superlative degree is usually rendered to God. This is alluded to in the doxology found in 1 Tim 6:16 o` mo,noj e;cwn avqanasi,an fw/j oivkw/n avpro,siton o]n ei=den ouvdei.j avnqrw,pwn ouvde. ivdei/n du,natai\ w-| timh. kai. kra,toj aivw,nion avmh,n) / “who alone has immortality, dwelling in unapproachable light, whom no human has seen nor can see, to him be honor and might forever. Amen.”

In this passage, several attributes are predicated to God, yet at the same time they are being acknowledged as rightfully and uniquely his. He alone possesses immortality. The use of the adjective mo,noj indicates the uniqueness of God in having immortality, and this shows his distinctive greatness over the worshipper in terms of existence.60 God is immortal; the worshipper is mortal. The implication here shows that the worshipper is therefore dependent on God as the source of immortality and life itself. Louw and Nida note that the noun avqanasi,a means “the state of not being subject to death (that which will never die),” and that “[t]he clause ‘who alone is immortal’ may be expressed in some languages as simply ‘he is the only one who never dies’ or ‘he is the only one who always exists.’”61 Neyrey notes that this attribute of immortality predicated to God denotes a “singular uniqueness, because God ‘alone’ enjoys this extraordinary quality.”62 The implied contrast, therefore, is to show God as the eternal self-existing one and the human as the existing one dependent on God for life itself. The relationship between the worshipper and God is thus marked by a dependence of the worshipper on God. The description of God dwelling in unapproachable light reinforces the distance and thus the reverence between the one worshipped and the worshipper. Neyrey notes that “[a]ncient monarchs were

42

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

notorious for limiting and denying access to their presence as a mark of worth and high status; hence the more inaccessible, the more honorable.”63 The unapproachability of God in this doxology implies an inaccessibility. If God is beyond human access and approachability, it also reinforces the idea that the deity cannot be manipulated, controlled, or harnessed by the worshipper. Here we note again the distinctiveness between the inferior minor subject who worships and the superior major object who is worshipped. In the ancient world, to know the name of a certain deity was to exercise a certain type of possession and dominion over the deity and to secure his help and aid.64 The inaccessibility of the deity also denotes a degree of unknowability or incomprehensibility, thus once again emphasizing the distance between the worshipper and God. Hence, there is an implication of spatial distance in the text as well as a noetic distance between the worshipper and the God who is worshipped. An emphasis of dependence is thus established here. Another emphasis in this doxology is on the invisibility of God. No one has seen or can see God. This further reinforces the theme of unapproachability. If God is unseen, then he cannot be visually accessed, and further, he cannot be physically handled or held by the worshipper. The praise or the giving of glory to God is usually qualified with a duration clause, which is usually “forever and ever” (eivj tou.j aivwn/ aj) or in this particular doxology, “might forever” (kra,toj aivwn, ion) or “eternal dominion” (NRSV). The duration of praise or glory being “forever” or “forever and ever” also shows by way of indefinite time the ontological greatness and distance of the worshipped God from the worshipper. The doxology comes to an end with the affirmative “amen,” which is intended to function as the worshipping communal response to what has been affirmed about God. At the same time, the use of the “amen” in the doxology “invites the hearers to affirm and acknowledge the praise.”65 Thus the doxology is meant to function by way of affirmation and acknowledgment of the greatness of the deity. David Stanley notes that a doxology is “an expression of the praise of God, often containing explicit references to the divine ‘glory’.”66 The religious and personal relational aspect of worship is seen here in the ascribing and acknowledging of the worshipper to the worshipped God by the use of superlative qualities, and the response of the worshipper in affirmation of such praise and acknowledgment is affirmed by the communal response “amen.” The “amen” is in itself, “a strong affirmation of what is declared.”67 In the doxology the worshipper demonstrates his or her relationship to God as one of a servant who recognizes, acknowledges and affirms his or her master’s greatness and supremacy. Another example is seen in Rom 11:33–36 where Paul emphasizes in a doxology a noetic distance as well as an ontological distance between God and the human. He writes in Rom 11:33–36,

A PROPOSED DEFINITION AND CRITERIA FOR WORSHIP

| 43

33 +W

ba,qoj plou,tou kai. sofi,aj kai. gnw,sewj qeou/\ w`j avnexerau,nhta ta. kri,mata auvtou/ kai. avnexicni,astoi ai` o`doi. auvtou/ 34 Ti,j ga.r e;gnw nou/n kuri,ou h" ti,j su,mbouloj auvtou/ evge,neto 35 h" ti,j proe,dwken auvtw/| kai. avntapodoqh,setai auvtw/| 36 o[ti evx auvtou/ kai. di auvtou/ kai. eivj auvto.n ta. pa,nta\ auvtw/| h` do,xa eivj tou.j aivw/naj avmh,n) 33 O

the depth of riches and wisdom and knowledge of God! How unfathomable are his judgments and incomprehensible are his ways. 34 For who has known the mind of the Lord, or who has become his adviser? 35 Or who has first given to him and it will be given back to him? 36 For from him and through him and to him are all things. To him be the glory forever. Amen.

In this doxology, Paul utilizes a number of descriptions to show the superlative greatness of God. He begins by stressing the “depth” of God’s riches, wisdom, and knowledge. The use of the word “depth” indicates the deep vastness of God’s riches, wisdom, and knowledge, and this stress is made in contrast to the worshipper. Louw and Nida indicate that among the meanings of ba,qoj the use of this noun in Rom 11:33 indicates “an extreme point on a scale of extent – ‘extremely, exceedingly great, very very.’”68 Sanday and Headlam define ba,qoj as “inexhaustible wealth.”69 Such use of language as “depth” and “unsearchable” and “inscrutable” would seem superfluous unless it is meant to be taken in contrast to the human, who does not share in such superlative attributes which God only possesses. The contrast is also emphasized as true by the responsive and assertive use of the “amen” by the worshipping community at the conclusion of the doxology. As the worshipped object, God possesses all riches, all wisdom, and all knowledge. The use of plou/toj (“riches”) like ba,qoj (“depth”) also denotes an extreme point on a scale as Louw and Nida note: “a high point on any scale and having the implication of value as well as abundance—‘great, abundant, abundantly, greatly, extremely.’”70 While the worshipper may have these (riches, wisdom, and knowledge) to a finite degree, God possess them to an infinite degree, thus the stress on the depth of these virtues held by God. The unsearchability and inscrutability of the ways of God show the inaccessibility of God while at the same time indicating the noetic distance between God and the worshipper. The use of the negative adjectives avnexerau,nhta / “unfathomable” and avnexicni,astoi  / “incomprehensible” in Rom 11:33 are an example of what Neyrey calls “negative predication.”71 Negative predication involves using some form of the alpha privative that would preface an epithet and thereby deny any imperfection in the deity while acclaiming his superiority to all things including mortals.72 These negative predicates, according to Neyrey, “attest God’s uniqueness in the universe. To God alone exclusively belong glory, greatness, height, wisdom, goodness, and kindness.”73 God’s judgments and ways are far above the apprehension of the finite creature. The noetic distance is also stressed

44

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

in three rhetorical questions posed by Paul in the doxology (Rom 11:34–35): Who has known the mind of the Lord? Who has been his adviser? (v. 34),74 and who has ever given to God something so that God would have to give something in return (v. 35)?75 These rhetorical questions implicitly demand a negative answer,76 in short, no one has known the mind of the Lord, no one has been his counselor, and no one has ever given to God so that God should owe something back in return. These questions reinforce the inability of the worshipper to comprehend the mind of God, and with this inability the plans and intentions of God are also concealed from the worshipper. The idea of reverence and respect is shown in the fact that God is not in need of counsel from the worshipper, since the giving of counsel presupposes a lack of information on the other party. God is not in need of counsel since he has “depth” in wisdom and knowledge. God does not owe anyone anything since no one can give him anything, for God has a “depth” of “riches” and thus lacks nothing.77 By way of contrast, the worshipper does lack and hence is dependent on God for everything (cf. Ps 104). The worshipping creature cannot add anything to God by way of increase that he does not already fully possess (cf. Ps 24:1; 50:10–12). Since nothing can be added to God by way of increase that would effect a change, God is thus immutable (cf. Num 23:19; 1 Sam 15:29; Mal 3:6; Rom 11:29; Jas 1:17). God is complete in what he possesses (riches, wealth, knowledge) and is not in need of anything for his aseity (cf. Exod 3:14–15; Ps 90:2). God is thus in philosophical terms a necessary being, and not a contingent being. God is therefore independent. The doxology appears rather as an acknowledgment of God’s noetic and ontological greatness in contrast to that of the worshipper. The full possession of the virtues of riches, wisdom, and knowledge, and God’s unsearchability (cf. Deut 4:11–12; 1 Kgs 8:12; Job 11:7–9; Isa 40:12–31) and inscrutability further heighten the implicit distance between the worshipper and God. The ontological contrast is made by Paul in his assertion that the reason why God is the quintessential source of all riches, wisdom, and knowledge, is because all things come from him, through him, and to him (Rom 11:36). In this sense, Paul shows God as the source (from him), the agent (through him), and the goal (to him) of all things.78 Everything owes its existence to God (Gen 1:1; Ps 33:6). In this description, Paul says something important about God in terms of source, agent, and goal.79 God is the beginning and cause of all things, the one through whom all things have come, and he is the ultimate goal in all things.80 As a result, God is praised and given glory for his status as creator. In this respect, God is ultimately the goal of all things, and Paul concludes this doxology by rendering glory to God forever and ever and acknowledges the rendering of this glory to God with the assertive “amen,” which is the response of the worshipping community to what has been declared about God.

A PROPOSED DEFINITION AND CRITERIA FOR WORSHIP

| 45

Paul sees an eschatological dimension to worship here in that glory is to be given to God forever by virtue of the fact that God is ultimately the cumulative goal of everything (cf. Phil 2:11; cf. Ps 29:10; 47:7–8; 74:12; Zech 14:9). Worship to God not only attributes the highest virtues to God (riches, wisdom, and knowledge; cf. Rev 5:12; 7:12) but also attributes an unapproachability to his mind (cf. Isa 55:8–9; 1 Cor 2:16), and to his ways (cf. Isa 55:8–9), thus magnifying the contrast between God and creature (cf. Num 2:19; Hos 11:9; John 4:24). The attribution of glory to God “forever and ever” emphasizes his timelessness. This again presents another contrast between God and the worshipping creature, the element of time. God is timeless or infinite (cf. 1 Kgs 8:27; 2 Chr 2:6; 6:1, 18; Ps 90:2; 147:5; Jer 23:24), and the creature is time bound or finite (cf. Job 8:9; Ps 90:9–10; 102:11; 144:4; Eccl 6:12). According to Paul, the personal relationship between the worshipper and God can be described as one of a contingent being in relationship to a necessary being (cf. Acts 17:28). By these terms is meant that the worshipper is always in a relationship of dependence upon God for all things, while God is dependent on none but himself and hence God is independent as we noted above. The nature of this dependence is expressed by way of the personal relationship between the worshipper and God and expressed in action by various means such as praise, giving glory, thanksgiving, and so on. These expressions are meant to acknowledge God for who he is. In the above doxologies, there is a marked distinction between God and the worshipper, and this distinctiveness and contrast is emphasized by an implied distance between God and the worshipper, which appears to be a literary genre in doxology intended to heighten God and his identity. In the first doxology (1 Tim 6:16), we noted a distance by means of existence. There is first an existential distance between the worshipper and God (mortal and immortal). The second point is that of an implicit spatial distance with an affirmation of unapproachability and inaccessibility to God by the worshipper. The third point is that of visual distance. God is invisible (cf. Deut 4:11–12; 5:22; Job 9:11; 23:8–9; John 1:18; 6:46; Rom 1:20; Col 1:15), which further emphasizes his unapproachability and inaccessibility by the worshipper so that worship is between the visible (worshipper) and the invisible (God).81 The uniqueness of these attributes is qualified by the author’s use of the adjective mo,noj, which carries the meaning of “the only entity in a class.”82 In the second doxology (Rom 11:33–36), the distance between the worshipper and God is also emphasize and heightened. The first point raised is the superlative qualities that God possesses in an unlimited fashion such as riches, wisdom, and knowledge. God is wealthy (“riches”), wise, and all-knowing, and this is expressed in terms of “depth.” This reinforces what we have said above in regards to the word “glory” when it is applied to God as it points to God’s abundant wealth of riches and possessions. In this respect, there is a distance between God and

46

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

the worshipper in terms of virtues and attributes. With these virtues comes the unsearchability and inscrutability of God. As a result no one, including the worshipper, can know what is in God’s mind, nor can he be his adviser or counselor or give God anything to oblige God to return the favor. In this respect, there is a noetic distance between God and the worshipper. The reason for God’s independence, Paul asserts, is because he is the creator of all that is or exists, or ta. pa,nta / “all things,” which refers to the totality of everything.83 All things come from him, through him, and back to him. Paul points to God as the ultimate source, agent, and goal of everything. It is, according to Paul, because of God’s identity and status as creator and source of all things that he is entitled and deserving of acknowledgment and affirmation, and this constitutes the basis for worship for Paul on the part of the worshipper. It is following the statement of God’s creatorship that Paul ascribes glory to God “forever and ever” and concludes with the assertive “amen,” which would also include the worshipping community (the readers / hearers) as well as Paul himself. Worship is described here as an on-going activity: God is to receive glory “forever and ever.” The doxology serves as a declarative statement usually of the greatness of God and his contrast to that of the worshipper. The doxology also has God referred to in the third person, and the response of the worshipping community is appended to the doxology with the “amen.” It is the nature of the contrast between God and the worshipper that serves as the basis for worship in Paul. The context is religious because it involves a human subject, who is the worshipper, and a divine object, who is God, and in this religious context, level of actions by means of declaration and acknowledgment are rendered to God. The criteria I proposed seem to fit well here. God is to be worshipped because of who he is and what he has done. Worship is the attribution of the honor that should be rendered to God by his worshippers, and this worship is mediated by means of a personal relational religious act expressed through and in various actions or levels of action like doxologies. We conclude this section by examining a word that appears in 2 Thess 2:4.84 In the surrounding context (2 Thess 2:1–12),85 it speaks about the coming of an adversarial figure called the man of lawlessness and son of destruction (2 Thess 2:3). In 2 Thess 2:4, he is described as usurping the place of the divine or God by sitting in the temple of God and proclaiming himself to be God. This adversarial figure desires to be above any object that is worshipped so that he becomes the object of worship. The context indicates that this usurpation is taken negatively and that this figure is destined to be destroyed at the appearance and parousia of Jesus (2 Thess 2:8). Of particular interest to us in this study is the use of the word se,basma, which is defined by Louw and Nida as an “object of worship.”86 BDAG defines it as a “devotional object,”87 but it also refers to a sanctuary or place of worship, including altars and statues through which worship was offered (cf. Acts

A PROPOSED DEFINITION AND CRITERIA FOR WORSHIP

| 47

17:23).88 This recalls the criteria that an object of worship can also include representations of the divine such as idols.89 This word only appears in 2 Thess 2:4 in the Pauline corpus. Here we note that there is a Greek word that communicates the idea of an object of worship. Closely connected with the object of worship, se,basma, is its syntactical association with the preceding words pa,nta lego,menon qeo.n by the use of the disjunctive particle h;.90 Here we see syntactically the close association between a so-called god and an object of worship so that a so-called god = an object of worship. This again seems to fit the criteria for worship that in order for worship to take place, the object must be a superhuman entity such as God or a god, thereby also making the context a religious one. The religious tone is also seen in 2 Thess 2:4 in its reference to the “temple of God” and the declaration by the adversarial figure that he is God. In making a claim to be God and sitting in the temple, the adversarial figure makes himself an object of worship.

3.2. The Subject of Worship and the Criteria for Proper Worship We turn now to examine the subject of worship, i.e., the worshipper, or the active participant who worships God. What qualifies the subject according to Paul to be a true worshipper of God as opposed to a false one? Did Paul have a set of criteria that a true worshipper of God had to fulfill in order to render true and proper worship to God?91 We will assess Paul’s understanding of the subject of worship by way of the criteria we have established. In his letters, it appears that Paul understands the subject or worshipper to stand in a relationship to God wherein he or she is always totally dependent on God. This total dependence upon God is communicated by Paul by means of employing various relational terms such as servant-master (Rom 14:4; 2 Cor 6:4) and child-parent (Rom 8:14–17; 2 Cor 6:18; Gal 3:26; 4:5–6). These terms imply an inferior-superior relationship between the worshipper and God, including the idea of dependence of the worshipper on God. Other times Paul will employ metaphorical language in which the worshipper is called a “living sacrifice” (Rom 12:1), a “temple of the Holy Spirit” (1 Cor 6:19–20), or collectively with other worshippers as the “temple of God” (1 Cor 3:16–17; 2 Cor 6:16), “a holy temple in the Lord” (Eph 2:21). Paul sees the worshipper in a faithful relationship of loyalty, love, allegiance, and submission to God the way a servant or child would be to his or her respective master or parent. The difference in terms of submission as we noted earlier is that in reference to God there is total submission whereas in reference to all others (government, parents, elders / leaders of the church, fellow believers), submission is partial and relative.

48

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

Paul’s description of how believers ought to worship God will shed some light on how Paul viewed the subject of worship and the qualification for proper worship. We seek to examine whether or not Paul held to criteria for a proper type of worship as opposed to a false and illegitimate type of worship. The following passages will be addressed more fully throughout the course of this research, but we refer to them primarily at this point only to obtain information on whether Paul had set criteria for worship. The three passages we will consider are Phil 3:3, 1 Cor 10:19–22, and 2 Tim 2:22.

3.2.1. Philippians 3:3 h`mei/j ga,r evsmen h` peritomh, oi` pneu,mati qeou/ latreu,ontej kai. kaucw,menoi evn Cristw/| VIhsou/ kai. ouvk evn sarki. pepoiqo,tej / “For we are the circumcision, who serve by the Spirit of God, and boast in Christ Jesus and who have no confidence in the flesh.”

In this passage, Paul presents a sharp contrast between his worshipping community and another party which he refers to as “the dogs,” “evil workers,” and “those who mutilate the flesh” (Phil 3:2).92 Paul includes himself with the worshipping community by his use of the first person plural pronoun h`mei/j, which is in the emphatic position,93 and the first person plural verb evsmen. Paul asserts concerning his worshipping community, h`mei/j ga,r evsmen h` peritomh, / “For we are the circumcision.”94 In referring to the worshipping community as h` peritomh, / “the circumcision,” Paul is employing this term, according to Peter O’Brien, as a collective noun;95 in short, Paul is speaking of the whole Christian worshipping community. By speaking of circumcision Paul is evoking a term that has covenantal overtones, since circumcision became the covenantal sign between God and his people in the OT (Gen 17). The terms of the covenant would be a two-way relationship between God and his people where he would be faithful to them and they were to be faithful to him. The covenantal nature of circumcision language, which is based on Gen 17, confirms the personal relational religious aspect between the worshipper and God, since Paul connects the act of religious service or worship (latreu,ontej) with the worshipping community, who are said to be the circumcision. To be in a covenant relationship with God implies a worship context, and this agrees with my criteria because the context is a religious one since God is the object. The idea of covenant as noted carries the notion of faithfulness in relationship between two parties. In calling the Christian faith community the circumcision, Paul implies they are in covenant with God and are to be faithful to him in relationship. The aspect of faithfulness in a covenant, especially with God’s covenant with Israel in the OT, was expressed by means of marriage (Ezek 16:8, 60) where

A PROPOSED DEFINITION AND CRITERIA FOR WORSHIP

| 49

the two spouses were to be faithful to one another.96 YHWH was the husband and Israel was his wife (Isa 54:5; Jer 3:4, 8; Hos 2:16). To be in relationship with other gods by means of exercising various levels of action (sacrificing, praying, invocation) to them was tantamount to spiritual adultery and a breach of the covenantal marriage relationship with YHWH (Exod 34:14–16; Deut 31:16; Ezek 16:23). Paul elsewhere also uses marital language to describe the relationship of the Christian faith community as a betrothed bride to Christ her husband (2 Cor 11:2).97 Paul employs in this text the language of qeou/ zh,lw|  / “divine jealousy” (ESV), “godly jealousy” (NIV), or even “the jealousy of God himself” (NLT), or “God’s own jealousy” (NEB) to describe his protective concern and care for their marital relationship to Christ. The language of God’s jealousy for his bride Israel in the OT is also described along similar terms. God is described as qeo.j zhlwth,j evstin / “a jealous God” (LXX Exod 34:14), just prior to warning Israel about committing sexual immorality with other gods (Exod 34:15). Paul is concerned that the faith community is forsaking their sincere and pure devotion to Christ (2 Cor 11:3), and turning from Christ to “another Jesus” (2 Cor 11:4), thereby violating their relationship to their espoused husband. Undoubtedly, Paul was familiar with the marriage metaphor used in a covenantal context. He thus uses this metaphor to call for faithfulness on the part of the faith community to Christ. The implication in Phil 3:3 is that the worshipping community is the “true circumcision,” as the NASB and RSV translate it, and hence they are in covenant with God with whom they are to remain faithful and true. Their faithfulness to God in covenantal relationship is expressed in their worship by the Spirit of God. While Paul does not use the adjective “true” here with “circumcision,” the implication is intended by the contrast he makes with the other group, which he pejoratively dismisses (Phil 3:2). In identifying the Christian believers as “the circumcision” or the true circumcision, Paul is implying that they are consequently the true descendants of Abraham with whom God made the covenant and initiated circumcision as the sign of that covenant. In referring to his worshipping community, including himself, as the true circumcision, Paul has in mind here the internal circumcision of the heart, a notion that is also steeped in the OT.98 This implies for Paul that true genuine worship for Paul proceeds from the heart to God. The idea of the circumcision of the heart is also attested in Second Temple Jewish literature in both the book of Jubilees and Philo (20 BCE–50 CE). In Jub. 1:23, a text dealing with the restoration of the people and implicitly referring to worship by reference to people following God, there is an interesting connection between the circumcision of the heart which God will accomplish and “a holy spirit” which will be given to those whose hearts have been circumcised. Jub 1:23 reads,

50

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

But after this they will return to me in all uprighteousness and with all of (their) heart and soul. And I shall cut off the foreskin of their heart and the foreskin of the heart of their descendants. And I shall create for them a holy spirit, and I shall purify them so that they will not turn away from following me from that day and forever.99

Here it should noted that God will accomplish this spiritual circumcision and that he will create for them a holy spirit and purify them, and that the purpose for this is so that they will always faithfully follow God, which implies worshipping him. As we shall see, Paul also draws a similar connection between true circumcision, which implies a spiritual circumcision of the heart (cf. Col 2:12), and the Spirit of God. In Jub. 1:23, however, the reference to creating a “holy spirit” seems to imply a new heart on the part of the worshipper (Ezek 36:26; cf. 11:19; 18:31). The point, however, is the connection between circumcision of the heart and following God, which implies worship. Philo speaks of circumcision as having a double meaning, one external and physical, and the other internal and spiritual. Of the inner circumcision, Philo states that it involves “becoming clean and pure from all wickedness and vile” so that the male “may worship God as his priest. This therefore is what is designated by the second circumcision.”100 Philo also makes the connection between circumcision and worship in showing that spiritual circumcision involves the act of in this case, the male being made clean and pure from wickedness so that he may worship God as his priest.101 The language is clearly religious and thus the context is one of worship. Philo seems to agree with Paul that this spiritual circumcision is a necessary qualification to worship God. Where Philo differs from Paul is that he applies this metaphor of spiritual circumcision only to men,102 but Paul sees the whole faith community as one in Christ irrespective of sexual gender (Gal 3:28), and thus his use of the plural in Phil 3:3 would seem to include both male and female believers.103 The idea of spiritual circumcision being associated with purity brings another important aspect of worship to the forefront in terms of presentation. When one presents himself or herself before God, one should do so in a pure manner. In the OT Levitical law, meticulous rules and regulations regarding purity had to be followed to prepare the priest(s) to present themselves before YHWH in order for them to legitimately serve him by way of worship in the tabernacle, and later, the temple.104 The story of Nadab and Abihu, the sons of Aaron who were killed by YHWH (Lev 10:1–11) for entering / “strange fire” (KJV, ASV, NASB, NET) the tabernacle and offering or “unauthorized fire” (ESV, NIV),105 which he did not command, demonstrates the principle of proper presentation before God in worship in conformity with his commands.106 The offering of strange fire to YHWH by Nadab and Abihu was improper and did not constitute proper worship of YHWH in purity, which

hr"z" vae

A PROPOSED DEFINITION AND CRITERIA FOR WORSHIP

| 51

resulted in drastic and fatal consequences. The idea of presentation before God in worship is depicted in Ps 24:3–4:107

hw"hy>-rh;b. hl,[]y:-ymi3 Avd>q' ~Aqm.Bi ~Wqy"-ymiW rv,a] bb'le-rb;W ~yIP;k; yqin>4 hm'r>mil. [B;v.nI al{w> yvip.n: aw>V'l; af'n"-al{ 3 Who

shall go up to the hill of YHWH? And who shall stand in his holy place? 4 He who has clean hands and a pure heart, who does not lift up his soul to what is false,108 and does not deceitfully swear.

This text from the Psalter asks a series of questions about who may be able to approach and present oneself before YHWH in his holy place. These questions raise the subject of qualification in terms of who is qualified to approach YHWH and to stand before him. The act of standing appears to denote attention and presentation before a superior. The response is given that the only one who can approach YHWH is the one who has clean hands and a pure heart. The clean hands appear to refer to one’s actions and the pure heart to one’s thought life and motives.109 The items given in the following clause in Ps 24:4b describing the one “who does not lift up his soul to what is false, and does not deceitfully swear,” according to Hans-Joachim Kraus, are the “two offenses . . . mentioned that preclude participation in the worship: worship of idols and perjury.”110 We see from this that the worship of God entails one’s presentation before him in a pure state and one which includes ultimate and total submission to God in relationship to him without compromise. Ps 73:1 asserts that God is good to those who are “pure in heart,” thereby showing a stable relationship between God and the worshipper. The worship of idols would thus be a betrayal and a defilement of one’s total submission to God. These qualifications for worship seen in Ps 24:3–4 appear to be consistent with Paul’s view of worship in Phil 3:3. Paul implies by contrast that the Judaizers are not of the true circumcision and that by implication, their hearts are not circumcised, and thus they do not render true worship to God. If the Judaizers are not the true circumcision, then it implicitly seems to follow that they are the false circumcision, and consequently they are not true worshippers of God. This line of thinking also seems to be implicit in Ps 23:3–4. Kraus argues that in this psalm there is an implicit reference to the “true Israel” (cf. Gal 6:16) who “are cultically prepared and that appears before Yahweh.”111 Those who have “clean hands” and a “pure heart” would in this sense be the “true Israel” that worships YHWH in purity versus those who commit

52

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

idolatry and perjury and are not pure to worship him. Paul thus appears to assert here that only the Christian community truly worships God, they are the one true people of God, and by process of elimination the Judaizers are out. An important qualifying factor which Paul includes in the context of worship is the means by which the faith community worships God. Paul asserts he and his faith community are they oi` pneu,mati qeou/ latreu,ontej / “who worship God in spirit” (RSV) or “who worship in the Spirit of God” (NRSV), or “who worship by the Spirit of God” (ESV).112 Worship is presented here in experiential terms in that worship is experienced in or by the Spirit of God and not necessarily on religious observance.113 The Spirit of God facilitates worship in this case and as a result is a necessary ingredient to the context of worship according to Paul. An additional identity marker that Paul sees as an ingredient of the worshipping community is his reference to the worshipping community as those who “boast in Christ Jesus.”114 This idea appears to find its source in the OT reference to one’s boasting in knowing God (LXX Jer 9:23–24).115 Fee argues that Paul is implying the same identity marker in Phil 3:3 in his reference to boasting in Christ Jesus.116 The idea of boasting in the Lord according to Jer 9:23–24 in the LXX rests in “knowing the Lord.”117 The idea of knowing the Lord implies a relationship between the worshipper and the Lord. In speaking of Christian believers as those who boast in Christ Jesus, Paul will go on to argue that he has no grounds for self-boasting (Phil 3:7–10) because ultimately his boast is in the Lord, who is the risen Jesus (cf. 1 Cor 1:31). A final identity marker Paul notes is that the worshipping community puts no confidence in the flesh, which includes “human status, privilege, or achievement.”118 This may be an ironic blow against Paul’s opponents who pride themselves in the flesh probably by way of physical circumcision, which would lead to claims about special covenant status and privilege.119 Paul rejects these as real identity markers for the true worshipper. This shows that Paul did see worship as having proper qualifications in order for it to be genuine and legitimate. Paul sees these qualifications as fourfold, according to Phil 3:3. First, he implies here by reference to the true worshippers of God being the circumcision that this must involve a changed or circumcised heart. Secondly, that true and legitimate worship must be exercised by or in the Spirit of God. Thirdly, if there is anything to boast of, it is as Paul has asserted only in Christ Jesus. Fourthly, they put no confidence in the flesh because they understand God to be the source of all they are and have. I conclude that in Phil 3:3 Paul sharply distinguishes what he believes to be true worshippers from false worshippers (cf. Phil 3:2). Paul provides criteria in which he lists at least four identity markers for the true worshipping community. The four identity markers of the worshipping community are:

A PROPOSED DEFINITION AND CRITERIA FOR WORSHIP

1. 2. 3. 4.

| 53

they are the [true] circumcision they worship by the Spirit of God they boast in Christ Jesus they put no confidence in the flesh

We can conclude from this that Paul understood, regarding the subject of worship or the worshipper, that there were true worshippers of God and false worshippers, and that they were distinguishable. Furthermore, Paul did employ criteria to identify those who were part of the true worshipping community. These criteria become identity markers for the worshipping community. The first qualifying mark of those who were in relationship to God was circumcision, which was the sign or badge of the covenant and was based on a two-way relationship between two parties, in this case, the person / faith community and God. Paul sees the worshipper in a covenantal relationship with God. Paul understands true circumcision to be of the heart (Rom 2:28–29; cf. Col 2:11), a notion already rooted in the OT and Second Temple Jewish literature. Secondly, the means in which the subject(s) worshipped was by or in the Spirit of God. The Spirit of God himself facilitates worship. Thirdly, another identity marker was that they boasted in Christ and not themselves. In this respect, the worshipping community has a Christocentric element to it, and this underlines the importance of the risen Jesus in the worshipping community. The risen Jesus appears to be indispensable to the qualifications and identity of the worshipping community. Fourthly, the last identity marker in Phil 3:3 is that they put no confidence in the flesh. Their confidence is in God alone and their boast is in Christ Jesus. This confidence in God and boasting in Christ supports the criteria that a worship context implies that there is a dependency of the worshipper on God. The level of action in which the subject, the worshipper, renders service to God who is the implied object in Phil 3:3 is accomplished by or in the Spirit of God. Phil 3:3 therefore shows that Paul does have criteria for proper worship.

3.2.2. 1 Corinthians 10:19–22 ou=n fhmi o[ti eivdwlo,quto,n ti, evstin h" o[ti ei;dwlo,n ti, evstin 20 avll o[ti a] qu,ousin Îta, e;qnh(Ð120 daimoni,oij kai. ouv qew/| qu,ousin ouv qe,lw de. u`ma/j koinwnou.j tw/n daimoni,wn gi,nesqai 21ouv du,nasqe poth,rion kuri,ou pi,nein kai. poth,rion daimoni,wn ouv du,nasqe trape,zhj kuri,ou mete,cein kai. trape,zhj daimoni,wn 22 h" parazhlou/men to.n ku,rion mh. ivscuro,teroi auvtou/ evsmen 19 ti,

19

Do I say then that food sacrificed to idols is anything, or that an idol is anything? But that which [the Gentiles/nations] sacrifice, they sacrifice to demons and not to God; and I do not wish that you have fellowship with the demons. 21 You cannot 20

54

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons; you cannot partake of the table of the Lord and the table of demons. 22 Or do we provoke the Lord to jealousy? Are we stronger than he?

In this passage, Paul is dealing with the issue of food offered or sacrificed to idols and whether it is proper for Christians to consume such food.121 Paul reasons that food sacrificed to idols and idols themselves are really not anything in and of themselves (1 Cor 10:19) because ultimately there is for the Christian believer only one God and one Lord (cf. 1 Cor 8:4, 6). Nevertheless, Paul’s use of eivdwlo,qutoj indicates that he has in mind a worship context here.122 The word eivdwlo,qutoj, according to Louw and Nida, means “the meat of animals which have been sacrificed to idols – ‘sacrificial meat, meat of animals sacrificed to an idol.’”123 The practice of sacrifice entails a religious worship context so that what has been sacrificed to idols (usually meat) involves a medium or level of action, namely, the act of sacrificing the said meat to the idol. Paul does not deny that idols can be worshipped here; he admits that they can be. Idols stood, as we noted above in our definition of worship, as visible representations of various deities in the GrecoRoman world. As the representation of a deity, an idol became a religious object, and as a religious object it was used in worship. Thus worship is clearly intended and implied in the passage. Paul’s primary concern is that even though the idols are nothing in themselves, behind the idols to which the sacrifices are offered there are in fact demons (1 Cor 10:20). As a result of this, Paul does not see this act of sacrificing as a neutral activity or meaningless,124 but rather, a spiritually dangerous exercise. We noted above in our brief discussion of Ps 24:3–4 that the first among the two chief offenses that precluded one from approaching and presenting oneself to God in a state of purity (“clean hands” and a “pure heart”), was the worship of idols.125 It is possible that Paul may have had these purity principles for worship in mind when he deals with sacrifices offered to idols. The very act of sacrifice which constitutes a context of worship (level of action) would make these demons behind the idols into gods, thus making them objects of worship. The equivalent identification of idols with demons is already attested in the OT (LXX Ps 95:5).126 In Greek literature, the idea of sacrifice was also seen as a level of action that when exercised in a religious context denoted worship.127 This is seen in Euripides where he quotes the Greek god Dionysus as denouncing the mortal Pentheus, who refuses to sacrifice to and make mention of Dionysus in his prayers.128 The basis for offering sacrifice and prayers to Dionysus is that he is a god and the son of Zeus.129 Here we see that because of Dionysus’s identity as “a god” and “the son of Zeus,” he becomes the object of worship because the context is religious in nature. Sacrifice appears therefore

A PROPOSED DEFINITION AND CRITERIA FOR WORSHIP

| 55

in a religious context with an intended object in mind who is considered divine or superhuman and who receives worship by way of a level of action that in this case is sacrifice.130 Philo also agrees with Paul that sacrifice in a religious context does denote worship, and he understands that while sacrifice can be offered to something other than God, it is nevertheless illegitimate worship because they are qusi,aj avqu,touj / “unholy sacrifices.”131 They are unholy sacrifices according to Philo because of the object to which they are directed, related to, or offered to. In the case of Philo, he is alluding to the golden calf incident taken from the OT (Exod 32). The equivalence of sacrifice in a religious context with worship is also evident in Second Temple Jewish literature such as 1 Macc 2:15–28 where Mattathias and his sons refuse to offer sacrifice (qusia,zw) to pagan gods as this would constitute the worship of such gods. Philo also sees genuine worship as a context in which God alone is the object. Paul makes a similar argument. The reason he vehemently prohibits believers from eating food offered to idols is because such food has in actuality been sacrificed to demons and not to God. Since God is not the direct object of these sacrifices, these sacrifices even though religious and used in a context of worship are nevertheless illegitimate. The legitimacy of the sacrifice as a level of action is intricately connected to the identity of the object. Sacrifice denotes a surrendering act of complete and total submission to the deity or deities. Robertson and Plummer note that in the practice of sacrifice there is a “communion” or fellowship, or a partnership between the deity and the worshippers.132 The idol temples that housed these idols and where food was offered or sacrificed to these idols thus becomes for Paul the virtual and actual habitation of demons. The idols become in essence the locus of demons.133 Paul proceeds to make a sharp distinction and contrast in 1 Cor 10:20 between idols / demons and God. Here Paul makes a contrast in worship, especially in reference to the object of worship. Paul reminds the Corinthians that what is offered to idols is not offered to God but rather to demons, and Paul prohibits them from engaging in this worship practice by consuming such food which has been thus offered. Paul is forbidding and prohibiting any relationship with the demonic,134 which he sees as inherently related to idolatry. The language Paul employs here such as koinwno,j indicates a relationship. Louw and Nida define koinwno,j as “one who participates with another in some enterprise or matter of joint concern – ‘partner, associate, one who joins in with.’”135 Paul does not want Christian believers to have any fellowship, partnership, or association with demons. There is no place for compromise here. Paul is addressing here the issue of legitimate worship. This indicates that while worship can be rendered to something other than God, in this case idols / demons, for Paul it is illegitimate worship. Paul is intent on showing rather that only God is the legitimate object of worship. Paul recognized that the

56

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

act of sacrifice was indicative of worship because it functions, as we have argued, as the medium or the level of action whereby the subject or the worshipper relates to the object of worship. Paul makes another interesting statement to the effect that he does not want the Corinthian Christians to become partners with demons in the act of sacrificing to them through the idols. This indicates that what one worships, one is in relationship to, as we noted in the definition of worship at the beginning of this chapter in our study, namely, that worship is a relational religious act. Fitzmyer captures this point when he argues that becoming partners with demons involves “those who share in a worship service of such gods (in reality, demons).”136 Paul does not want the Corinthian believers who are worshippers of God and therefore in relationship to God to be in relationship or partnership with the demons. One cannot be a worshipper of God and a worshipper of idols / demons at the same time, as one’s allegiance thus becomes divided. Paul brings this incompatibility in worship to the forefront by raising a number of contrasting statements, namely, that a Christian believer cannot drink both the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons; likewise, he or she cannot partake of both the table of the Lord and the table of demons (1 Cor 10:21). The respective acts are incompatible and diametrically opposed to one another. Paul demonstrates by this contrast that partaking of food in a religious worship context is not inconsequential or insignificant. To partake of food offered to idols / demons is ipso facto to enter into a worship relationship or partnership with those idols / demons.137 Similarly, to partake of the cup and table of the Lord is to enter into a worship relationship or partnership with the Lord. The use of “the cup” in a religious context is mentioned by Homer where he describes a feast to Poseidon in which meat is used, but also “the cup” is used as a drink offering or libation to Poseidon.138 Here we note that because the direct object in this case is a divine figure, a god, and the level of action is eating and drinking and pouring libations in honor of this god, then worship takes place. Paul thus fuses the act of partaking in a sacred or religious meal within a worship context. To share food is to establish a context of fellowship139 whether it be in a family setting or a social setting with friends or colleagues.140 The sharing of food or a meal in a social setting also affirmed one’s identity with others of the same group while also at the same time distinguishing one’s identity from others of a different group. According to Hal Taussig, “[t]he festive meals of early Christianity were a social stage on which early Christian identity was elaborated.”141 Christian identity was expressed by action, and Paul sees the sharing of food offered to idols as out of character with what a Christian should be. The partaking of meals carried with them a powerful identity marker both individually and communally. Taussig comments:

A PROPOSED DEFINITION AND CRITERIA FOR WORSHIP

| 57

When people gathered for meals in first-century Mediterranean cultures, the event was laden with meaning. Meals were highly stylized occasions that carried significant social coding, identity formation, and meaning making. Participating in a meal entailed entering into a social dynamic that confirmed, challenged, negotiated both who the group as a whole was and who the individuals within it were.142

Partaking in meals said something about the collective identity of the group, but also of the identity of the individuals that comprise the group. At the same time as we noted, partaking in meals also said something about what the collective identity of the group and the individuals that comprised it was not. In other words it also affirmed their identity in contrast with others and “acted as barriers and cement to the dining relationship.”143 Food unifies but also divides.144 Meals in this case take on an element of an identity boundary marker.145 They also take on an element of association markers. Who you are is tied into whom you eat with. Stephen Wilson notes that “communal eating and drinking are a fairly constant feature of life in associations.”146 To share a meal with someone, according to Paul, was to indicate acceptance of that person or persons.147 In this respect, to share a meal with someone who eats food offered to idols / demons is to violate not only one’s identity as a Christian believer but also to violate one’s identification with the faith community as a whole. In the Greco-Roman world of Paul, to make a libation to a particular god was a practical expression that identified a person not only with one’s family but also identified him or her with the god with whom the family was attached to.148 Here we see an example of how a meal not only ties one to his or her family, but also simultaneously ties them in a religious context to the god(s) the family worships. Fellowship cannot be shared with both the Lord and the demons, and to drink and eat from one table is to exclude the other. Paul appears to be addressing some in the Corinthian congregation who seemed to have a compatibilist idea that it was permissible to drink and eat from both tables. Taussig remarks that “[i]t is not at all beyond reason to think that some individuals raised a cup to Bacchus one night and to Jesus the next.”149 It is this idea that Paul appears to be denouncing. A Christian believer cannot be divided in his or her allegiance to God. Paul reminds them that the table and cup of the Lord is an identity marker and if they eat and drink from that table and cup, they are identifying themselves with the Lord Jesus. Taussig argues the point further: “That early Christians raised the cup uniquely to Jesus . . . was done against the backdrop of other meals’ experimentation and tension with the libation as identity marker . . .. this setting provided a strong assertion of social identity . . .. the very act of raising the cup to Jesus had elements of resistance.”150 Here we observe that Paul did not regard all worship as legitimate. For Paul what determines the legitimacy of worship is the very object of worship that receives worship itself, and for Paul this is God.

58

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

To further heighten the prohibition against entering into forms of worship with something other than God, in this case idols / demons, Paul raises two questions in 1 Cor 10:22, h" parazhlou/men to.n ku,rion mh. ivscuro,teroi auvtou/ evsmen; / “Or do we provoke the Lord to jealousy? Are we stronger than he?” What is particularly significant here is that Paul makes reference to provoking to.n ku,rion / “the Lord” to jealousy. Paul is stating that the Lord who is the risen Jesus can be provoked to jealousy by the idolatrous acts of Christian believers in their partaking of the idol meals within the idol temples. The act of provoking one to jealousy implies an intimate relationship between two parties where one is unfaithful to the other. Louw and Nida define the verb parazhlo,w as “to cause someone to feel strong jealousy or resentment against someone.”151 Paul insinuates here that believers in partaking of these foods offered to idols / demons are being unfaithful to the Lord and are provoking him to jealousy because they are supposed to be in a loyal relationship of allegiance to him. Paul also raises the question, “Are we stronger than he [the Lord]?” In using the inclusive “we,” Paul appears to be appealing to the Corinthians152 while at the same time showing that the Lord’s “anger cannot be braved with impunity.”153 Paul insinuates here that the Lord will take action against his own if they do not cease in provoking him to jealousy by their unfaithfulness in rendering worship to idols / demons. Here we note that there are consequences in breaching the terms of a relationship with the Lord. In summary, in 1 Cor 10:19–22 Paul is presenting a context of rival worship. The context, however, remains at its base level a cultic one. Paul’s main concern here seems to be on worship in terms of its legitimacy and illegitimacy. While Paul dismisses the notion that idols are really anything (cf. 1 Cor 8:4) or that food offered to them is anything, Paul’s primary concern is that in eating food that has been offered or sacrificed to idols, Christian believers are by that act entering into communion or fellowship with the invisible objects behind the idols, namely, the demons. In short, food offered to idols is food offered to demons. To partake of that food is to forge a relationship with the object(s) to whom that food is offered. Paul sees this as a grave violation of worship to God because he dismisses the notion that these sacrifices are given to God but rather to demons. Paul strongly forbids Christian believers from entering into any form of partnership or association with demons via eating food offered to them. Paul then draws a contrast between eating foods offered to idols and eating or partaking of the table and cup of the Lord (the Eucharist). Paul sees in the act of partaking of a meal in a religious context an expression of fellowship with the intended object with whom the meal is associated. Christian believers cannot partake of the table and / or cup of demons and that of the Lord. Paul makes no compromise and warns that to eat of one is to exclude oneself from the other. That Paul takes this practice seriously can be seen in the fact that he warns the Corinthians by way of two questions, that if they

A PROPOSED DEFINITION AND CRITERIA FOR WORSHIP

| 59

continue to partake of food offered to idols / demons, they provoke the Lord to jealousy, and they are not stronger than the Lord, who reserves the right to judge them for breaching their relationship with him (cf. 1 Cor 11:28–32). I also note here that we can discern a criteria for worship. There are two subjects indicated in 1 Cor 10:20–21. The first are the ones who offer sacrifices to demons. These are implicitly unbelievers who perform the level of action of offering food to the objects who are idols but who in reality are demons. In doing so, they forge an alliance or friendship. While Paul does not clearly identify the ones doing this, the MS tradition indicates that the term ta. e;qnh / “the Gentiles” (KJV, NKJV, ASV, NASB),154 or “pagans” (ESV, NET, NIV, NJB, NRSV, RSV), was later inserted into the text as an ancient gloss for clarification.155 The second subject Paul has in mind are the believers. The level of action in which they are participating is that of partaking of the food that has been offered to idols / demons. Since the object of this offered food are the idols / demons, Paul sees such partaking of this food on the part of believers as a level of action in which they are engaging in fellowship or partnership with the objects of this food, i.e., the demons, and in effect they are entering into a worship context with these demons. This is unacceptable according to Paul because the believer is already associated in a worship context with God in partaking of the Eucharist (table and cup of the Lord), and he or she cannot legitimately be involved in another worship context. Paul’s criteria for worship involved the question of legitimacy. While anything can be worshipped such as idols, Paul perceives this worship to be illegitimate. The only proper and legitimate worship according to Paul is the worship of God, and such worship demands a level of action in which God must be the object, with no rivals. Paul’s understanding of legitimate worship to God rests on as we shall see below the identity of God as creator of all things (Rom 1:20–25). All things come from him, through him, and back to him. Paul points to God as the ultimate source, agent, and goal of everything (Rom 11:33–36). Everything else apart from God is part of the category of creation. To render worship to anything in the created order is to deny the sharp distinction between creator and creation and to commit what in Paul’s mind is the antithesis of legitimate and true worship of God: idolatry.

3.2.3. 2 Timothy 2:19d, 22 VAposth,tw avpo. avdiki,aj pa/j o` ovnoma,zwn to. o;noma kuri,ou . . . ta.j de. newterika.j evpiqumi,aj feu/ge di,wke de. dikaiosu,nhn pi,stin avga,phn eivrh,nhn meta. tw/n evpikaloume,nwn to.n ku,rion evk kaqara/j kardi,aj / “Everyone who names the name of the Lord must turn away from unrigteousness . . . So flee youthful passions, pursue righteousness, faith, love, peace with the those calling upon the Lord from a pure heart.”

60

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

A number of ethical imperatives are issued to Timothy in this text which also includes avoiding false teachers (2  Tim 2:14–23).156 We wish to focus on two phrases in 2 Tim 2:19d, 22. In 2 Tim 2:19d, the phrase VAposth,tw avpo. avdiki,aj pa/j o` ovnoma,zwn to. o;noma kuri,ou / “Everyone who names the name of the Lord must turn away from unrigteousness” makes a connection between one who names the Lord and that person departing from iniquity. The name of the Lord here is believed to be a reference to the risen Jesus.157 The verb ovnoma,zw means not only “to name” but also “to call by name.”158 Louw and Nida define it as “to utter a name in a ritual context . . . ‘to pronounce a name, to call out a name.’”159 Related to our investigation is the pertinent comments also made by Louw and Nida that ovnoma,zw is “an idiom, literally ‘to name the name of the Lord’) to employ the name of the Lord as evidence that one worships the Lord – ‘to say that one belongs to the Lord’ or ‘to declare that one is a worshipper of the Lord.’”160 Thus in this case we have a phrase that denotes a worship context in 2 Tim 2:19d. One therefore who worships the Lord is one who departs or does not practice unrighteousness, “wickedness” (NASB, NIV, NRSV), or “evil” (NET, NJB). There is a theme here of separating oneself from wickedness if one worships the Lord. We note that in 1 Cor 10:19–22 above Paul was also emphasizing that the Corinthian believers separate themselves from eating food offered to idols / demons in order to show their allegiance to God. There is thus an implicit theme between separation from evil or iniquity and ethical living for one who names the name of the Lord in worship. Towner also suggests that the theme of separation from evil insures that the people of God are safe from his judgment.161 If this is so, then we have a faint echo of 1 Cor 10:22 where Paul warns the Corinthians that if they do not depart or cease from eating food offered to idols, they will provoke the Lord to jealousy and incur the consequences. Ethical living according to 2 Tim 2:19d is thus consonant with worship and a criterion for it. A further exhortation is given in 2 Tim 2:22 with a number of ethical imperatives to flee or shun youthful passions, and to pursue honorable virtues such as righteousness, faith, love, and peace. Fee sees a connection between 2 Tim 2:22 and 2:19 and notes that 2 Tim 2:22 is an echo of 2:19.162 Timothy is commanded in this text that he should fulfill these instructions not only on his own, but with (meta.) those who call on the Lord from a pure heart. When the preposition meta, is used with the genitive as it is here, it denotes association, accompaniment, “with,” “in company with” and in spatial terms it denotes being “with” or “among”163 others, in this case the worshipping community. I wish to focus primarily on the phrase meta. tw/n evpikaloume,nwn to.n ku,rion evk kaqara/j kardi,aj / “with those who call upon the Lord from a pure heart.” The to.n ku,rion / “the Lord” here in keeping with traditional Pauline linguistic parlance is a reference to the risen Jesus.164 I leave aside the issue of invocation for the time being

A PROPOSED DEFINITION AND CRITERIA FOR WORSHIP

| 61

and will return to it later below. I only note that the idea of calling on the Lord is an idiom expressive of worship. Hurtado notes that the reference to calling on the Lord or the name of the Lord finds its roots in the OT and is expressed as “a ritual action of worship,”165 and Collins states that this practice has a “cultic ring” to it and “it evokes a prayer formulation addressed to the Lord.”166 Moreover, Collins writes that the writer “recalls what Christians do when they come together as a worshipping assembly.”167 Here it should be noted as Hurtado and Collins do, that this expression or idiom suggests a worship context. A perquisite to calling on the Lord involves having a pure heart. This can imply that anyone can call on the Lord, but that the proper mode or state of calling on the Lord must involve a pure heart.168 The worshipper must be authentic in his worship.169 Here we see again the aspect of presentation in worship. It is not enough to merely assemble with others in a faith community to worship; a person must present oneself in a pure manner before God which proceeds from a pure heart. Here we also see the notion of the internal aspect of worship in that it is offered from a pure heart. God is presented in the biblical texts as the one who alone sees and reads the hearts of humans (1 Sam 16:7; Ps 7:9; Prov 21:2; Jer 17:10; cf. Rev 2:23 where the risen Jesus is said to do the same). This notion of calling on the Lord from a pure heart and approaching God with a pure heart as we saw above in our treatment of Phil 3:3 is a theme rooted in the OT. This theme sometimes appears in a worship context as we saw in Ps 24:3–4 where among the qualifications of the one who ascends the hill of the Lord and stands in his holy place is that this person must have clean hands and a pure heart (kaqaro.j th/| kardi,a;| LXX Ps 23:4 / bb'lî -òe rb;W; MT Ps 24:4. In Ps 73:1 (LXX 72:1) the text states that God is good to those who are “pure in heart” (ESV). In summary, this text calls for ethical living as a consequent of being a worshipper of God. Thus one who names the name of the Lord should depart from unrighteousness or wickedness (2:19d). One of the criteria that is used to qualify true worship is the state of one’s heart. A person who calls on the Lord, which is an expression of worship, must do so from a “pure heart” (2:22). The implication here is that if such worship is not rendered with a pure heart, it is not truly worship. The state of a pure heart in the worship of God may be implied in Paul’s statement in Phil 3:3 that Christian believers worship God by the Spirit of God and that they are the true circumcision where circumcision in this case would be spiritual or of the heart.170 Thus 2 Tim 2:19d, 22 seems to be concerned with the intention and state of the worshipper’s heart and a consequent of this state is reflected in one’s ethical living. We note here again the proposed criteria. The subject who is the worshipper performs a level of action that in this case is calling on the Lord, who is the object, with a pure heart. The calling on the Lord denotes a dependence of the worshipper on the Lord for aid or help, and again we see here a relational religious act where the subject is inferior to the superior object who is the Lord.

62

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

3.3. The Worshipping Community as Family of God We have seen above that Paul sees the personal relational religious act of worship expressed in the paradigm of servant-master where the servant is the worshipper and the master is the worshipped one, namely, God. The servant-master paradigm demonstrates the distinction we made between the inferior and the superior, the minor and the major, and the medium or level of action in this case involves the service that the servant renders to God, who is his or her master. We wish to address Paul’s understanding of the worshipping faith community as the family of God. Paul uses the family context to express the personal relational religious act of worship, namely, that of child-parent.171 The child in this case is the worshipper and the parent is God. Paul viewed his worshipping communities in terms of familial lines. This is not a new study in NT scholarship. We are using the family paradigm in this section to investigate the relational aspect of the family and examine this relational aspect in the light of worship to God. Paul’s worshipping communities were “in Christ”172 and God is first and foremost “to.n qeo.n kai. pate,ra tou/ kuri,ou h`mw/n VIhsou/ Cristou/ / “the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ” (Rom 15:6; 2 Cor 1:3; Eph 1:3, 17; Col 1:3).173 The Pauline communities were thus by extension the children of God by adoption through Jesus Christ (Rom 8:15, 23; Gal 3:26; 4:5).174 Hurtado further notes that what we encounter here in the description of God as the Father of Christ is a “reidentification of God by reference to Jesus,” which “indicates the importance of Jesus in early Christian devotion as group identity-marker.”175 Thus the title of “Father” in reference to God is intricately related to the risen Jesus and in wider context it is related to worship itself. The worship of God is exercised within a familial context in which God as Father receives honor from his children. This familial context is made possible according to Paul through the agency of Jesus through whom God has made believers his children (Gal 3:27). They all have God as their “Father,” and thus Paul can speak of God to them as “our Father” (Rom 1:7; 1 Cor 1:3; 2 Cor 1:2; Gal 1:3; Phil 1:2). The term “our Father” is rare in the Pauline letters and is usually used in the context of thanksgiving or petition.176 Paul as usual includes himself with his faith community by use of the first person plural pronoun. God as Father, in the social-cultural world of Paul, would demand along familial lines deep respect, allegiance, and honor. Jerome Neyrey notes that the appellation of “father” to God “reflects the cultural world in which fathers were owed honor, respect, and obedience. . . . It honors God in his premier role as father and patron, and so acknowledges the respect God’s children owe him.”177 Paul sees God in relationship to his communities as uniquely paterfamilias, “head of the household.” Neyrey also notes that the relationship between God and believers as we find in the Pauline communities would reflect the social-cultural world of Paul’s day, which in “that culture [means] fathers were owed respect,

A PROPOSED DEFINITION AND CRITERIA FOR WORSHIP

| 63

not affection; theirs was a most honorable role, with sanctions to enforce proper performance.”178 This helps to explain why Paul takes the performance of the daily lives of his worshipping communities very seriously and calls them to be accountable to their spiritual calling (Rom 12:1–2). In living dishonorably, they were in effect dishonoring God and in so doing disrespecting the one who was Father to them in Christ. The practice endorsed by Paul of the greeting with the “holy kiss”179 as a social-cultural expression of familial ties in the faith communities was an external form of faith practice. Such an action as kissing was normally performed in the social-cultural world of Paul among very close friends or family members.180 The practice of the “holy kiss” also demonstrates a reciprocal act in Paul’s churches181 in which believers as equals reinforced their identities as brothers and sisters in Christ.182 This practice also demonstrated the relationship that the worshippers had with each other. In loving and welcoming one another with the “holy kiss,” they were also expressing the love which they had experienced in God the Father of their new family in Christ.183 The familial context is also seen in Paul’s view of the worshipping communities as his spiritual siblings (“brothers and sisters”; e.g., Rom 1:13; 7:1, 4; 8:12; 10:1; 11:25; 15:14, 30; 16:14, 17; 1 Cor 1:10–11, 26; 2 Cor 1:8). Paul could also assume the paternal role of father over them when he gives them fatherly admonition (1 Cor 4:15). Paul compares Timothy’s service to him as that of a son to a father (Phil 2:22). Paul also speaks of his care for the Thessalonian Christians as that of a father to his children (1 Thess 2:11), and his care as a father for the slave Onesimus (Phlm 10). In the Pastoral Letters, Timothy is said to be Paul’s child in the faith (1 Tim 1:2, 18; 2 Tim 1:2; 2:1), as is Titus (Titus 1:4). Paul does, however, refer to his readers as his siblings much more frequently than his description of himself as a father to them.184 It is possible that this infrequent mention of Paul as their father may be due to his emphasis that God is their true Father (Rom 1:7; 1 Cor 1:3; 2 Cor 1:2; Gal 1:3; Phil 1:2). Paul’s understanding of family here, especially as it relates to that of honor between children and parents, is an important one for understanding Paul’s view of worship. As we have noted Paul employs familial language to communicate the relationship Christian believers have with God and with one another, the former being a vertical relationship and the latter a horizontal relationship. In the ancient world, the idea of honor in the family, particularly between children and their parents, was an important one, and this will help elucidate Paul’s viewpoint on the matter.185 Aristotle in his work Ethica nicomachea also provides a helpful source to understand the place of honor in the family. Aristotle gives due attention to the relations within households. The fathers’ first care is for the welfare of their children, just as a king or shepherd cares for the welfare of those whom he is responsible for. Aristotle writes:

64

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

The friendship of a father for his child is of the same kind (only here the benefits bestowed are greater, for the father is the source of the child’s existence, which seems to be the greatest of all boons, and of its nurture and educational and we also ascribe the same benefits to our forefathers). . . . These friendships then involve a superiority of benefits on one side, which is why parents receive honour as well as service.186

Here it should be noted that while a relationship of friendship can exist between a father and his child, nevertheless, due to the status and position of the father qua father, the benefits that the father bestows are greater than what the child can give or render to him. The place of superiority in the father according to Aristotle is grounded on the fact that “the father is the source of the child’s existence” but also on the fact that the father as the source of the child’s existence is also the provider of the child’s necessities such as his or her “nurture and educational” needs. The father hence becomes both source and provider of the child. The reciprocal response to the status of the father as source of his child’s existence and his or her provider is that the father (and mother) are to receive both honor and service from their child(ren). It is the identity of the superior (in this case the father) and his ability to provide that determines the degree of honor and service that is to be rendered. Here the medium or level of action between the minor and major should be recalled. The child expresses his or her gratitude in relation to the parent by rendering honor and respect to them. When this occurs on a religious level between a child of God and God the heavenly parent, then worship is exercised. Children do not worship their parents because their relationship to their parents is not a religious one. Aristotle goes on to assert that parents indeed love their children as part of themselves while children love their parents as the source of their being (Eth. nic. 8.xii.1). Moreover, he states that children love their parents as their superiors on the basis of their birth, upbringing, and education (Eth. nic. 8.xii.5), which again underscores the parents’ status, function, and ability as providers. Here we note in the child-parent relationship that we have what can be called a vertical dimension in relationship in that it is a relationship based on an inferior (the child) or minor, and a superior (the parent) who is the major thus implying a dependence of one (the child) on the other (parent).187 In the same respect, Paul sees God as Father, and as Father, God is the source of the existence of his children because ultimately he is creator (cf. 1 Cor 8:6). The benefits that God provides for his children are superior to what his children can reciprocate to him since as we noted above they can never “out-give” their heavenly parent. These benefits are expressed by means of provision for the children’s welfare such as nurturing and educational needs. Paul speaks of God as not only Father to his children but also as the one who will supply their needs (Phil 4:19),188 and the one who teaches

A PROPOSED DEFINITION AND CRITERIA FOR WORSHIP

| 65

them (1  Thess 4:9;189 cf. Eph 4:20–21), and who also gives his Spirit to teach them (1 Cor 2:12–13). By using the metaphor of family relationships in relation to believers and God, Paul raises the metaphor and places it in a relational religious context whereby worship is realized. When it comes to the relationship of siblings such as brothers, Aristotle states that with brothers it is more a matter of comradeship in which both parties are equal. They love each other as “being from the same source, since the identity of their relations to that source identifies them with one another . . . they are of the same being, though embodied in separate persons” (Eth. nic. 8.xii.3; italics mine). Aristotle notes that in a family context, siblings stand on an equal ground in relationship to each other. The equality of their relationship with one another is linked to the fact that they come from the same source, namely, their parents. Since the parents are the source of their children’s existence, the vertical relationship of the child-parent paradigm model becomes definitive of the relationship the child has with other children of the same parents. As siblings they cannot claim superiority of one over the other since they all come from the same source, which is superior to all of them, namely, the parents. Here we can perceive the horizontal dimension in the relationship with siblings. As children of the same parents they are equal to one another and should reciprocate love to one another, and in so doing they show love for the source of their siblings, which is the same source as themselves.190 On the horizontal plane they are on an equal level playing field so to speak. In the case of siblings within the faith community, Paul sees them on a horizontal plane with each other, and he calls on them to reciprocate love for one another as they were instructed and taught by God their heavenly parent (1 Thess 4:9).191 They should love one another and should not consider themselves better or greater than another (cf. Phil 2:3–4).192 Paul also stresses the reality of their relational equality with one another as one in Christ (Gal 3:28). The one source of their existence as siblings Paul reminds them is the one God the Father (1 Cor 8:6).This point is reinforced again in Eph 4:6: ei-j qeo.j kai. path.r pa,ntwn o` evpi. pa,ntwn kai. dia. pa,ntwn kai. evn pa/sin / “one God and Father of all, who is above all and through all and in all.” God is presented as “the archetypal Father; all other fatherhood in the universe is derived from his.”193 Finally, I wish to say something of the servant-master paradigm, which Paul also employs to express the relationship of believers to God in worship. In this respect, there is a slight difference when we compare Paul’s view with that of Aristotle. Aristotle viewed the relationship between slaves and their masters as a very mechanical one when he writes, “For master and slave have nothing in common: a slave is a living tool, just as a tool is an inanimate slave. Therefore there can be no friendship with a slave as slave, though there can be as human being” (Eth. nic. 8.xi.7). Aristotle notes that the relationship between a slave and master

66

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

is virtually nonexistent and that friendship between the two is not possible as far as their societal status is concerned. In terms of status, a master and a slave qua slave can have no real amicable relationship, and a slave is reduced to being a “living tool.” As an inanimate tool is used to serve one’s purposes a slave functions as a living tool to serve his master’s purposes. In the final analysis, a slave is reduced to, in respect to societal status, a mere tool. However, Aristotle does not completely rule out the possibility of a master having friendship with his slave, although this friendship can only be realized if the master views and treats his slave not as a slave, in other words, not in terms of his societal status but as a “human being.” Aristotle thus leaves that option open in terms of relationship between master and slave but only in terms of seeing a slave as first and foremost a human being. The faith communities to whom Paul wrote were also made up of slaves.194 We know from Paul’s letter to Philemon that Paul was well aware of the relationship and responsibilities of slaves to their masters and of the penalties involved if the former escaped.195 Paul does not view slaves as mere tools as Aristotle mechanically defines them, but first and foremost Paul views them as equals in the context of the Christian faith community. The reason for this egalitarian view on Paul’s part is based on what I argued earlier that Paul views them in Christ as spiritual siblings, and if they are spiritual siblings, then they are ipso facto equals on a horizontal place. It was noted above that Aristotle argued that siblings are equals because they come from the same source (parents) and they ought to reciprocate love for each other on that basis (Eth. nic. 8.xii.3). However, Aristotle says this only of natural and biological siblings. Paul speaks of spiritual siblings in Christ. Thus for Paul when a slave becomes a Christian believer, he or she becomes an equal spiritual sibling in the Christian family and faith community; and because they are in Christ, all societal boundary markers that distinguish them from their masters are removed because they share a oneness of family and being with other spiritual siblings. In Christ, Paul argues, ouvk e;ni dou/loj ouvde. evleu,qeroj . . . pa,ntej ga.r u`mei/j ei-j evste evn Cristw/| VIhsou/ / “there is no longer slave or free . . . for all of you are one in Christ Jesus” (Gal 3:28).196 Paul makes this statement after asserting that all Christian believers are sons (or “children”; NRSV)197 of God through faith in Christ (Gal 3:26) thus utilizing family language.198 This indicates that Paul understands the spiritual family context of Christian believers as the basis for sibling equality and as the overriding factor for removing any societal boundary markers that would separate them. As spiritual siblings believers are “one” and therefore equal. Their equality again is based on their link to God as Father and source. An example of the transition from a slave status to that of a spiritual member of the Christian family can be seen in Paul’s letter to Philemon. Paul utilizes family language to elevate the slave Onesimus from the status of a mere slave to that of a spiritual family member. When Paul first mentions Onesimus, the slave

A PROPOSED DEFINITION AND CRITERIA FOR WORSHIP

| 67

of Philemon who ran away from him, it is interesting that Paul refers to him as tou/ evmou/ te,knou / “my child” and o]n evge,nnhsa evn / “whose father I have become” (Phlm 10). Paul cements his relationship with Onesimus by relating to him as a father to a child, thereby indicating that Onesimus is now part of his spiritual family. Paul’s statement that before Onesimus became a believer he was a;crhston / “useless” (Phlm 11) to Philemon seems to reflect Aristotle’s words that the relationship of a slave to his master was uncommon, since the slave was a mere “living tool” (Eth. nic. 8.xi.7). Now that Onesimus has become a believer Paul asserts that he has become eu;crhston / “useful” to both him and Philemon, thereby indicating a transition in status (Phlm 11). Now that Onesimus is a Christian believer he is a member of the spiritual family and thus should be accorded all and full rights as a family member. Paul affirms this transition by stating that Onesimus is to be received ouvke,ti w`j dou/lon avllV u`pe.r dou/lon avdelfo.n avgaphto,n / “no longer as a slave but more than a slave, a beloved brother” (Phlm 16). He is now a member of the spiritual family and an equal and thus Paul compares his return back to Philemon as if Paul himself was returning (Phlm 17).199 To summarize, the use of family language to describe the worshipping community is very important for Paul. We have seen from Aristotle’s work that the family unit was a central and important one in antiquity and that elements of Aristotle’s position are also found in Paul. It is within the context of family that one of the closest relationships exist, primarily that of the child-parent and that of siblings with one another. The parent is to be given special honor and service from their children as they are the source and provider of the children’s being and welfare. The child is the inferior party in this respect while the parent is the superior party who bestows benefits on his or her child(ren). I have termed this relationship vertical because one party is superior to the other based on his or her status or identity. In the relationship of siblings, such a relationship can be termed horizontal in that siblings stand on an equal footing with one another. Their relationship with one another, however, is predicated on their relationship to the source of their existence, namely, the parent(s). Slaves on the other hand were seen in antiquity as virtually devoid of any real friendly relationship with their master and that they were merely viewed as living tools to serve their masters. Paul understands these concepts and thus argues that Christian believers are children of God (Gal 3:28), and as children of God they owe their heavenly parent God ultimate honor and service. They are dependent on their heavenly Father. God as the heavenly parent provides for the sustenance of his children as well as their educational needs. In this child-parent relationship, God is the superior party who bestows gifts and benefits on his children. All those who are in relationship to God as Father are by virtue of that relationship spiritual siblings to one another, and thus reciprocate familial love to each other on a horizontal plane. While slaves were seen as mere

68

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

living tools, Paul saw slaves who became Christian believers as elevated to the status of Christian brothers and sisters and thus equal among spiritual siblings. This is evident in Paul’s letter to Philemon. In employing family language to the worshipping community, Paul has used a powerful metaphorical tool in establishing the relationship of Christian believers to God as children to their father and has used the metaphor to establish and communicate worship. The honor and service that they as children owe God constitutes worship, for in thanking him, praising him, and serving him, they acknowledge him and honor him as their Father, and it is in these actions that we detect the medium or level of action between the worshipper and God. As family all Christian believers are spiritual siblings to one another and therefore they all ought to view each other as equals, and reciprocate love for each other since they are spiritual children of the same Father. In this respect, Paul has shown that through the relationship paradigm of the family, Christian believers belong to God, and they owe him their allegiance and honor as their heavenly parent. In his treatment of the child-parent and servant-master relationship, Aristotle used the word “friendship” as the common denominator so that the relationship becomes that of friend-friend. This may prima facie imply an equal relationship and it can between two persons of the same status, but this is not the case when one party occupies a higher status than the other. Aristotle points out that there are indeed different types and degrees of friends or friendship, and these can also be distinguished on the basis of, for instance, equality of superiority or of family, or other forms of association. In this case, a father and child can be friends (Aristotle, Eth. nic. 8.xi.2–3), but the father as the source of the child’s existence and his or her provider occupies a higher position, which calls for a reciprocal response from the child to honor and respect him. Similarly, a master can be a friend with his slave on the condition that the slave be viewed not according to his or her vocation as a slave but as a “human being” (Eth. nic. 8.xi.7). In this relationship the master still occupies a higher position, which also evokes a reciprocal response of honor and respect from the slave notwithstanding their friendship. Paul never uses the term fi,loj in his letters, nor does the word appear in the entire Pauline corpus.200 Moreover, unlike Aristotle, Paul does not speak of the relationship of believers to God explicitly in terms of friendship.201

CHAPTER FOUR

Description of Pauline Worship in Light of Language

In this chapter, we will examine the language Paul employs for worship and observe the nuances of these words as Paul utilizes them in their respective contexts. Our purpose in exploring the various words Paul uses for worship is to see what each of these words mean, and what they individually contribute by way of their respective meanings to the overall subject or picture of worship. We will treat each of these words by looking at their lexigraphical definition as well as their use in Hellenisitc literature including the LXX. We will track their place in the Pauline letters and seek to understand Paul’s purpose in using them, and what he intended to communicate by their usage. Among the words Paul uses for worship, latreu,w, seba,zomai, proskune,w, and douleu,w are verbs and thus denote action. We will also examine the word qrhskei,a. These words are generally translated as “worship” in English translations of Paul’s letters. Paul not only viewed worship as a personal relationship between the worshipper and God, he also saw worship in terms of action which highlighted the relationship of the worshipper and God, and also reinforced the distinction between the two. Paul’s use of these various words to communicate the notion of worship indicates and confirms my conviction that unlike the univocal English word worship, Paul did not have one particular specific word for “worship,” but rather employed a number of words. The first word we will examine in Paul’s worship vocabulary is the verb latreu,w and the noun latrei,a.

70

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

4.1. latreu, w In examining latreu,w and later latrei,a, we will study their meaning and usage in the context of the Pauline letters including the manner in which Paul employs these words. Since words derive their meaning from the literary context in which they appear, we will pay close and special attention to the immediate context, for it is the context itself which infuses words with their meanings. Conversely speaking, words also infuse the context with its meaning. In this respect, we are primarily engaging the exegetical method. It is only when this exegetical method has been applied that we can in turn exegete the context of the passages from a theological perspective. In classical Greek literature, the verb latreu,w referred “to work for hire or pay, to be in servitude, serve.”1 BDAG defines latreu,w also as to “render cultic service.”2 The root of these words carry the idea of service, in this case, the carrying out of divine service or “to perform reliious [sic] rites as a part of worship.”3 Both words latreu,w and latrei,a denote religious service to the gods and divine worship in Greek religion.4 Plato used latrei,a in reference to service rendered to a deity.5 These words contextually and generally are used with a divine object in mind. The Hebrew parallel to this word in the MT is db;['.6 These same words latreu,w and latrei,a are used in the LXX in the context of worshipping or serving God (Exod 7:16; 8:1), as well as worshipping other gods (Exod 20:5; Deut 5:9).7 The verb latreu,w appears about ninety times in the LXX.8 The LXX uses latreu,w in the strictest sense of only denoting divine service to either God or gods, and is never used to refer to human relations.9 It is used in the LXX in delineating the worship that properly belongs to God as opposed to pagan gods.10 This word is also associated with the cult of sacrifices in the expression of service to God used in the LXX.11 In the words of Strathmann, latreu,w “is distinctively religious” wherever it appears in the LXX.12 In the NT, latreu,w has no reference at all to human relations or even secular services, but is used exclusively of worship to God.13 William Barclay thus notes that latreu,w in the biblical texts do not refer to service to humans, but is always used of the service to and worship of God.14 BDAG similarly makes the important point that while latreu,w carries the meaning of “serve” it is used “only of the carrying out of religious duties, esp. of a cultic nature by human beings.”15 The first thing we note here is the religious context pointed out by Louw and Nida and BDAG in which latreu,w appears, and as we have argued, if the context is religious then worship occurs. We also note that latreu,w expresses what we have termed according to point 2 of my criteria of worship: a level of action from a human subject to the worshipped object. The service that this word denotes is cultic in nature, but it should be noticed that BDAG also shows that these religious duties are carried out “by human beings” which I have argued in my criteria, function as the subject who performs the level of action. The worshipper carries out various expressions or levels

DESCRIPTION OF PAULINE WORSHIP IN LIGHT OF LANGUAGE

| 71

of action that communicate the relationship with the divine, but the direct object of latreu,w is a divine one. As we will see below, latreu,w while being translated as “serve,” it nevertheless has as the lexica above has borne out a cultic or religious service to God (or a god). In the case of latreu,w, the referent is divine; it is either in the biblical context God, or other gods, and hence latreu,w is case specific to religious service.16 Strathmann comments that: “latreu,ειν means more precisely to serve or worship cultically, especially by sacrifice.”17 Thus the act of sacrifice, another level of action, is also associated with latreu,w. We will examine how Paul also applies the idea of sacrifice as worship below. We have thus established that the appearance of the words latreu,w and latrei,a in a religious context indicate that they are used as a level of action to a divine object, and in this case worship takes place. We turn now to examine the appearance of these words in Paul’s letters. The verb latreu,w is uses by Paul three times in his church letters (Rom 1:9, 25; Phil 3:3), and once in the Pastoral Letters (2  Tim 1:3). The noun latrei,a is used twice (Rom 9:4; 12:1). The appearance of latreu,w in only two of Paul’s church letters (Romans, Philippians), should alert us to realize that latreu,w was not the standard word for “worship” for Paul as he only uses it in these two letters of Romans and Philippians and once in the Pastorals. The same can be said of the two uses of latrei,a in the letter to the Romans alone. If these terms were the standard words for worship, we would expect to find them with much more frequency in Paul’s letters, but we do not. This supports the contention that Paul did not have one particular word for “worship” but rather collected various words to communicate the overall idea or action of worship. The words latreu,w and latrei,a by their definitions as already noted carry the idea of divine service. This indicates one aspect of worship, namely, the act of serving or rendering service to God or doing service on his behalf. Paul uses latreu,w individually of his own personal worship (Rom 1:9), and also communally of the worship communities (Phil 3:3), thus indicating that Paul saw this religious service to God as exercised both individually and communally. One point that should be made is that when Paul uses latreu,w and latrei,a the referent is always God. This reinforces the religious connotation and context in which latreu,w and latrei,a appear. While Paul uses these words with God as their direct object, these words are never used of the risen Jesus by Paul in the context of worship in the Christian faith community.18 Paul reserves latreu,w and latrei,a only for God as their proper and legitimate object.

4.1.1. Romans 1:9–10a 9 ma,rtuj

ga,r mou, evstin o` qeo,j w-| latreu,w evn tw/| pneu,mati, mou evn tw/| euvaggeli,w| tou/ ui`ou/ auvtou/ w`j avdialei,ptwj mnei,an u`mw/n poiou/mai 10 pa,ntote evpi. tw/n proseucw/n mou / 9 “For

72

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

God is my witness whom I serve with my spirit in the gospel of his Son that without ceasing I remember you 10 always in my prayers.”19

This passage is part of Paul’s salutation to the Christian faith community in Rome, and his thankfulness to God for their widespread faith in Roman world (cf. Rom 1:7–8). In this particular passage, Paul notes that God is the one whom he serves in his spirit, which probably has reference to his inner being, that worship to God arises out of Paul’s very core. This would indicate an internal aspect of service to God. Paul indicates that he serves God in his spirit by the announcement or preaching of the gospel of God’s Son Jesus. This action or level of action amounts to religious service to God which is the meaning of latreu,w. Closely associated with latreu,w is prayer, which Paul also presents as an individual and private exercise on his part. Paul does not identify prayer as latreu,w in this text, but appears to associate it with his religious service to God. Prayer for Paul in Rom 1:9–10a is implicitly directed to God. Since this context is a religious one with God as the direct object, and the level of action of latreu,w is being exercised by the subject who is Paul, then this is a case where worship occurs according to the criteria. God is the object of Paul’s latreu,w while Paul and his faith communities are the subjects who render latreu,w or worship to God. The verb latreu,w in this case is used by Paul to communicate one aspect of worship, particularly Paul’s service to God, and what that service entails. Most English translations render latreu,w as “to serve” in Rom 1:9 and not as “worship,” even though the latter would be permissible as a translation. The only way to determine if worship takes place here is to examine the meaning and use of latreu,w. The translation of latreu,w as “to serve” is much closer to its original meaning, but its connotations of worship can only be detected because of the religious context in which latreu,w appears, and because the referent is a divine object (God) in the case of Rom 1:9. Here we also encounter the personal relational aspect of worship. In this passage, Paul speaks of his own personal worship to God thus showing that worship can be rendered and expressed individually, and not always within a communal setting as Delling20 and Moule21 to some extent have argued. Paul clearly has God as the referent of his personal worship or religious service, as indicated by the articluar nominative, followed by the relative pronoun and verb, o` qeo,j w-| latreu,w. The appearance of the dative masculine singular relative pronoun w- | / “whom,” although easily overlooked, indicates the personal nature of the relationship Paul has with God. He is the God whom Paul worships or religiously serves. Paul worships God with or in his spirit (evn tw/| pneu,mati, mou), which becomes Paul’s “organ of service”22 or worship, and the announcing of the gospel (evn tw/| euvaggeli,w|) becomes “the sphere in which the service [or worship] is rendered.”23 Paul’s worshipping of God in his spirit as noted above, may have

DESCRIPTION OF PAULINE WORSHIP IN LIGHT OF LANGUAGE

| 73

reference to his inward being, his very heart: in other words Paul worships God from the inside out as it were from the very core of his being.24 If this is the case, then we see an internal aspect of worship in that service to God is being offered from Paul’s spirit. It seems as if Paul sees the inward being as one source or an aspect from which worship proceeds from the worshipper to God. The one Paul personally worships or serves is God, and it is the gospel of his [God’s] Son that he announces.25 In this passage Paul equates the announcing of the gospel of God’s Son Jesus as his latreu,w or service to God. Paul shows here how his latreu,w is worked out or shown by way of a level of action. The dative evn tw/| euvaggeli,w| indicates as noted above that this was the sphere in which Paul rendered his worship or service to God. The preposition evn when used with the dative as seen in Rom 1:9 can carry the meaning of the instrumental case, “by means of.”26 In this case, Paul renders service to God by means of and through the instrumentality of the proclaiming of the gospel of God’s Son. While latreu,w as we have seen indicates a personal relational act of service to God, Paul shows here that worship to God can also be exercised in the announcement or preaching of the gospel and this becomes Paul’s level of action to show or express his latreu,w. When the gospel of Jesus is announced or preached, this constitutes worship to God because the announcement of the gospel is done in service to God and in obedience to him. Fitzmyer notes that Paul’s “cultic service is manifested in his evangelical preaching; to proclaim Christ Jesus is for Paul an act of worship that he directs with his spirit to God himself.”27 Brendan Byrne comments that Paul’s ministry in proclaiming the gospel amounts to a “genuine worship.”28 This shows that worship to God is rendered by way of action, namely, the action of the preaching or announcing of the gospel of God’s Son Jesus. Strathmann notes that “[i]n this case there is a measure of oscillation in the term latreu,ειν. Paul serves and worships God, he renders divine service, actively in the proclamation of the message and inwardly in intercession for the churches and for the progress of the Gospel.”29 According to Strathmann, Paul is presenting here two aspects of worship or latreu,w, an internal one and an external one. Paul connects his worship or service to God on two points which he refers to both in the dative: (1) he worships or serves God in his spirit (evn tw/| pneu,mati, mou), and (2) he worships or serves God in the announcement of the gospel (evn tw/| euvaggeli,w|). This would indicate that Paul saw the act of latreu,w as allowing both an inner act of service to God and an outward act of service. In proclaiming the gospel, which involves an outward or external action since Paul would communicate the gospel to people, Paul is performing latreu,w. He is in the service of God; he is performing a service that God wants him to perform. Thus in doing x (proclaiming the gospel to people), Paul is doing y (serving [latreu,w] God).30 In this particular case, the act of latreu,w

74

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

involves doing something for or to others (proclaiming the gospel to them), which God commands. While this does not involve a direct act of service towards or facing God (such as praying to him in direct speech, bowing to him, singing to him), it involves an indirect act of service in that it is done to others on behalf of or in service to God. In this case, Paul is serving or performing latreu,w under God’s shadow as it were. Another point to note is that it is the gospel of “his Son,” the gospel or good news of Jesus. Paul shows here implicitly that when the good news of Jesus is preached, God is worshipped, and this shows that Jesus of whom the gospel is about is related to the sphere in which Paul renders worship to God. In other words, Jesus is intimately related to the worship of God in Paul. The Jesus whom Paul has in mind is the risen Jesus whom God raised from the dead (1 Thess 1:10; Gal 1:1). In short, the risen Jesus is intimately tied and related to the Pauline worship of God. In referring to the gospel of God’s Son, Paul is bringing the risen Jesus into the sphere of Christian worship itself. Paul thereby shows that the risen Jesus is intimately related or connected to the Christian faith community and the worship that it expresses. The essential message for Paul is summarized in the two central foci of the death and resurrection of Jesus, and this appears as a consistent theme throughout Paul’s letters (Rom 4:25; 2 Cor 5:15; 1 Thess 4:14). Paul’s most complete description of “the gospel” appears in 1 Cor 15:1–4.31 There Paul sets out to enumerate the gospel by first reminding his readers that they received it from him (v. 1). The gospel was something Paul personally proclaimed and taught the Corinthians. Paul also asserts that their standing as Christian believers is on the gospel upon which they have taken their “stand.” It is also this gospel that saves believers (v. 2), provided they cling to the message Paul gave them; otherwise they have believed in vain. In the technical language of transmission, Paul reminds his readers that he delivered to them what he had received (v. 3),32 but it is noteworthy that Paul qualifies this statement by stating that what he received and delivered to them is prw,toij, of “first importance” (v. 3); in short, this according to Paul is the very core of the gospel.33 The adjective prw,toij is defined as “first, foremost, most important, most prominent,”34 and Louw and Nida define it as, “pertaining to exceeding everything else in importance – ‘most important.’”35 Paul then sets out to enumerate what the gospel is (vv. 3–4), and he breaks it down into three main points: 1. 2. 3.

o[ti Cristo.j avpe,qanen u`pe.r tw/n a`martiw/n h`mw/n / “that Christ died for our sins” kai. o[ti evta,fh / “and that he was buried” kai. o[ti evgh,gertai th/| h`me,ra| th/| tri,th| / “and that he has been raised on the third day”

In Paul’s gospel message is the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus. The central belief in the resurrection of Jesus finds its earliest reference by Paul in

DESCRIPTION OF PAULINE WORSHIP IN LIGHT OF LANGUAGE

| 75

1 Thess 1:9–10, a text we will examine below. There is no doubt that Paul places utmost importance on the resurrection of Jesus, for he argues that if Jesus was not raised from the dead, then all Christian faith, and by extension Christian worship, is rendered vain and superfluous (1  Cor 15:12–20).36 The resurrection of Jesus is the central and pivotal point of Christian belief and what gives the cross and death of Jesus its significance and soteriological meaning.37 Most importantly for Paul, and his worship context, is the relation of the risen Jesus as the living Jesus who is present in the worship gatherings of the Pauline communities.38 In linking his service to God with the announcement or proclamation of the gospel, Paul is religiously worshipping or serving God. Moreover, Paul is expressing his worship by the act or level of action of proclaiming the gospel. Paul is also implying a relational aspect of the risen Jesus to Christian worship. The content of the gospel according to Paul is about “his [God’s] Son” Jesus, but primarily it is about the risen and living Jesus39 whose personal presence is a reality in the Pauline worshipping communities (1 Cor 5:4).40 In addition to Paul’s reference to worshipping God in his spirit by the announcement of the gospel, he also mentions his practice of proseucw/n  / “prayers.”41 While we will examine the subject of prayer more fully below, we wish to make some observations concerning prayer in this passage. Ernest Best argues that Paul’s religious service or worship to God includes both his preaching of the gospel, and his prayers.42 While as we have seen the preaching of the gospel by Paul can be syntactically related to his service or worship to God by means of the dative evn indicating the sphere in which Paul rendered his worship to God, Paul’s mention of his prayers is not syntactically related to Paul’s religious service. While Paul makes no direct link, pace Best, between worship and prayer here, it may be implied because we do find that Paul does link latreu,w in close proximity to prayer.43 Paul thus sees the preaching of the gospel and prayer as linked closely with worship.44 In summary, in Rom 1:9–10a Paul uses the word latreu,w, which means “service.” He also associates prayer with latreu,w but does not equate the two words. In using this word, Paul is disclosing one aspect of worship that involves the worshipper serving God or doing what God commands. In this text, Paul describes his service to God as being with his spirit, which becomes the “organ of service,”45 but he also describes this service to God in terms of his announcing of the gospel, which becomes “the sphere in which the service is rendered.”46 We see both an internal and external aspect of service to God here. Paul serves God internally with his spirit, but this service is also expressed externally by Paul in proclaiming or announcing the gospel. In the act of proclaiming the gospel to others, Paul is in effect serving God under his shadow as it were. In this respect, proclaiming the gospel is the equivalent of serving God. Paul also mentions his prayers in close

76

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

proximity to his worship of God. Here we see that latreu,w need not communicate a direct act of service towards or facing God but can also communicate an indirect act of service by doing something to others which God desires or commands. The word latreu,w by itself does not fully define all of worship but functions rather as an important aspect in the mosaic of the whole picture of worship. Paul did not confine all of worship to his use of latreu,w but used the term to bring out the aspect of service to God.

4.1.2. Romans 1:21, 23, 25 21 dio,ti gno,ntej to.n qeo.n ouvc w`j qeo.n evdo,xasan h' huvcari,sthsan avll evmataiw,qhsan evn toi/j dialogismoi/j auvtw/n kai. evskoti,sqh h` avsu,netoj auvtw/n kardi,a 23 kai.

h;llaxan th.n do,xan tou/ avfqa,rtou qeou/ evn o`moiw,mati eivko,noj fqartou/ avnqrw,pou kai. peteinw/n kai. tetrapo,dwn kai. e`rpetw/n

25 oi[ t inej meth, l laxan th. n av l h, q eian tou/ qeou/ ev n tw/ | yeu, d ei kai. ev s eba, s qhsan kai. evla,treusan th/| kti,sei para. to.n kti,santa o[j evstin euvloghto.j eivj tou.j aivw/naj avmh,n) 21 For

although they knew God they did not glorify him as God or give thanks, but became vain in their reasonings, and their foolish hearts were darkened

23 and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for a likeness of an image of a corruptible human being, and birds, and four-footed animals and reptiles 25 Who exchanged the truth of God for the lie and reverenced and served the creature rather than the creator who is blessed forever. Amen.

In this section, we will only deal with verses 21, 23 and 25 of Romans 1 as they are particularly relevant to the subject of this study. While Paul uses two words that are part of the language of worship in Rom 1:25, we will only focus on latreu,w at this point and deal with seba,zomai later. In this passage, which has as its background Rom 1:18–32, Paul argues sharply for the disjunctive ontological category between to.n kti,santa, “the creator,” and th/| kti,sei, “the creature.” We have noted above that in the paradigm of worship there is an ontological distance between the worshipper and God, and that the distance is one of creature-creator. While the personal relational aspect of worship is sometimes that of servant-master, here it is ontologically speaking that of creature-creator. Paul argues that God has taken the action to disclose himself to humanity, and with that disclosure, comes human responsibility to the creator.47 The worshipper is defined ontologically in terms of creature, that which is created. God is presented as creator, and because of his identity and status as

DESCRIPTION OF PAULINE WORSHIP IN LIGHT OF LANGUAGE

| 77

creator, he is to be acknowledged, honored, and worshipped by that which he has made.48 We observed in the Pauline doxology above in Rom 11:33–36 that glory is to be given to God forever and ever because of the fact that all things have come from him, through him, and return back to him.49 This as we noted is descriptive of God’s identity as creator. To know God even as creator, according to Paul, is to worship God.50 This, however, must be qualified. One can know God and not worship him, which is Paul’s argument in Rom 1:21.51 In Rom 1:21, 23, 25, Paul makes a sharp and deliberate ontological distinction between the categories of creature and creator52 and this is important for what Paul will say about latreu,w as a level of action. This disjunctive category for Paul is the distinguishing and contrasting mark between the human and God. God is creator and qua creator he is to be rightly honored and worshipped, while creatures, on the other hand, as created categories, are not to be worshipped or honored as God. As he does in Rom 1:9, Paul uses latreu,w in Rom 1:25 in the context of religious service, but in this case he uses it to describe its misuse, abuse, and misappropriation, in that it is rendered to created things rather than to God. The object of latreu,w becomes a point of concern here for Paul. Paul is not denying that latreu,w can be offered or rendered to creatures or to things other than God, for he believes that it can. Paul is arguing rather that when latreu,w is given to something other than God, it is illegitimate and false. As Bauckham notes: “The [biblical] texts make clear that worship can, but should not, be given to other purported gods, other heavenly beings, other creatures.”53 Paul understands latreu,w as other Hellenistic texts understood it, namely, as a term denoting divine or religious service to a deity. Paul’s description of rebellious humans giving latreu,w to images or idols implies that they are treating these idols as divine objects, and hence, they offer religious service to them. Serving people, family, or society is not wrong, but giving latreu,w, divine or religious service to them, would be wrong because this service is rendered to deity alone or belongs to the category of God’s service. Here we recall the criteria for worship. In order for worship to occur, we argued that there must be a religious context in which there is a human subject (the worshipper), and a divine object (God / gods), and a level action to express the dependence of the subject on the object. In the scenario that Paul presents in Rom 1:21, 23, 25, he shows that what people have done is they have violated this paradigm between the human subject and the divine object by placing human, material, or created things as the object of their religious service, so that it results in the following paradigm: human / subject / worshipper and human / material / created / object. In so doing an imbalance results. Ronald Man asserts that: “true worship assumes a fundamental distinction between the object of worship [God / creator] and the worshipper [human / creature].”54 In short, the object of worship is not a legitimate one because it too belongs to the category or sphere

78

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

of created material things. Due to this imbalance, the level of action is illegitimate because it is not rightly appropriated and rendered to a divine object, who in the case of Paul, is God. This is Paul’s charge and he outlines it in three ways. First, Paul shows this imbalance between the subject (worshipper), and object (worshipped entity), as an attitude or act of dishonor and ingratitude to God (Rom 1:21). They refuse to “revere God,”55 to show him respect and honor. Secondly, Paul states that people have exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images of mortal humans or animals in general (Rom 1:23). To exchange the glory of God for an image of a creature is to rob God of his honor and status. The degeneration in this case goes in a downward spiral from human, to bird, and animals, downwards to reptiles. This indicates a descending scale or devolution in humanity’s rebellion against God by its refusal to acknowledge him as the rightful recipient of worship. Thirdly, Paul charges that people have also exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshipped and served the creature rather than the creator.56 That Paul understands the object of religious service or worship here to be illegitimate is seen in the language he employs. This is seen in terms of dishonor. Paul charges that they did not honor or glorify57 God as God (w`j qeo.n), or give thanks to him. Here Paul shows that the level of action (honoring, giving thanks) is misappropriated, because it was not given to God as the proper object of religious service, but rather given to that which is not the proper referent. Paul shows that to honor or glorify God also includes the act of thanksgiving. In refusing to acknowledge God, Paul states humanity became futile in their thinking and their minds were darkened. This shows a noetic breakdown or imbalance in the relationship between the creature and the creator. When worship is not rightly rendered to God, disorder sets in and this leads in turn to a spiritual degeneration in Paul’s view.58 Paul also uses the language of exchange (avlla,ssw), which means “to exchange one thing for another—‘to exchange, to substitute.’”59 People have exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images of mortal humans or created things which is a description of idolatry.60 There is a word play by way of contrast where Paul distinguishes between the avfqa,rtou qeou/ / “incorruptible God” and the fqartou/ avnqrw,pou / “corruptible human being.” The ontological distinction between God and the creature is brought out here as well as the ontological distance between God and the creature. Here Paul refers to both the subject and the object in the relationship of worship. The subject is fqarto,j  / “mortal” or “corruptible”61 and the object is a;fqartoj / “immortal,” “incorruptible.”62 Here we note the important ontological difference between the subject and object which is necessary for the paradigm of worship. The subject who worships is of the category of human, mortal, and creature. The object who is worshipped is of the category of a superhuman entity, immortal, and creator.

DESCRIPTION OF PAULINE WORSHIP IN LIGHT OF LANGUAGE

| 79

What Paul is showing in Rom 1:21, 23, 25 is an elimination of the divine object, and a substitution of it with the same category as the subject, so that the subject or worshipper(s) worships something like itself, i.e., creatures or created things. It is this ontological distance that we noted in the Pauline doxology (Rom 11:33–36) that is emphasized to show the marked difference between the subject (worshipper), and God (the worshipped object), and the utter dependence of the former upon the latter. Paul charges that latreu,w rather than being given to its rightful divine object (God), was given instead to a created material object(s). Paul states they rendered this latreu,w to created things para. to.n kti,santa / “rather than the Creator” (Rom 1:25). Moo notes that the preposition para. can also mean “instead of,”63 and Sanday and Headlam comment that the phrase para. to.n kti,santa is “not merely ‘more than the Creator’ (a force which the preposition might bear), but ‘passing by the Creator altogether’, ‘to the neglect of the Creator.’”64 Paul’s description of people worshipping created things instead of the creator is the direct opposite of what Aristeas wrote concerning the Jews “worshipping God rather than the whole creation.”65 Here Paul shows that not only is the object of worship illegitimate, but he also shows that the level of action, latreu,w is also illegitimate which brings us back to a breakdown in the paradigm for worship. For Paul in this text, God alone is worthy of latreu,w by virtue of his identity as creator. Worship thus is for Paul a dutiful personal response by the human creature, a natural consequence and action which the creature acknowledges and offers to God as the source of all things. We also note that Paul’s use of latreu,w in Rom 1:25 and its surrounding context indicates that it is a word especially connected with service to God which is worship. Most English versions translate latreu,w as “served” in Rom 1:25 with the exception of the NAB which translates it as “worshipped” and the NT translation by Monsignor Ronald Knox66 which translates it as a participle: “worshipping.” We note here as in Rom 1:9 that while “worship” is a permissible translation, this is an English imputation into the text, for Paul did not have as we noted any specific word for “worship.” We know that what is meant by the English word worship is present in the text because of the criteria we have established to determine what constitutes worship. The verb latreu,w denotes service, but it is religious service to a divine object. The context is a religious one which I have argued according to my criteria is a necessary ingredient to establish the presence of worship. Paul’s understands the level of action expressed by latreu,w to be one in which God is supposed to be the object or referent. When Paul does use this word, God is always the object of the verb (Rom 1:9, 25; Phil 3:3; 2 Tim 1:3). This use of latreu,w in reference to God shows that Paul understood this word to have a special meaning, and that it belonged within the religious context of worship.

80

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

Paul’s acknowledgment of God as the rightful and proper object of latreu,w is heightened by his addition of a doxology at the end of Rom 1:25, o[j evstin euvloghto.j eivj tou.j aivw/naj avmh,n) / “who is blessed forever. Amen.”67 Paul directs blessing and praise to God the rightful object of latreu,w and away from the folly of human idolatry. Here Paul appears to reestablish and correct the proper paradigm of worship between the human subject and the divine object. According to Käsemann, the idea that creatures should be worshipped instead of God “horrifies Paul” to the point that he “sanctifies God’s name doxologically.”68 The purpose of doxology according to Neyrey is to present a “prayer of acknowledgment”69 but also affirmation. We also noted that one of the elements of doxology is an emphasis on the distance between God and the human. In the context of Rom 1:21, 23, 25, the use of a doxology in 1:25 would serve Paul’s purposes in showing the vast ontological distance between God as creator and humans as creatures. By means of the doxology, Neyrey argues, God is confirmed and acknowledged as, “Lord, Patron, and Sovereign. . . . A doxology, therefore, is a ceremony that confirms God’s role and status.”70 The “amen” that follows the doxology is intended to function as an affirmative response either from the worshipper (in this case Paul), or the worshipping community (Paul and his readers). The doxology has the effect of inviting the hearers (in this case the Roman Christians), to affirm and acknowledge with Paul and with him to reestablish, confirm, and vindicate the proper paradigm for worship in giving praise to God and responding with the assertive “amen.”71 In summary, we have seen that the verb latreu,w is a strong word denoting religious service which is the nature of worship. It is case specific in that it has God (or a god) as its main reference point. By definition it denotes cultic service in a religious context and we see this religious context in Rom 1:21, 23, 25. We observe here that Paul uses latreu,w in a general sense in that he applies it universally to the actions of rebellious humans who have exchanged the glory of God for images of creatures whom they render latreu,w to. We encounter here the external aspect of latreu,w in Rom 1:25, humans give religious service directly to idols rather than to God. Here we see again one aspect of worship that of rendering religious service. To know God in a personal relational context is a prerequisite according to Paul for rendering latreu,w to God. Paul’s charge is that even though people have known God, they have refused to honor him as God, or give him the proper honor that is commensurate with his identity, which includes the rendering of latreu,w to him. To know God and not worship God, is to take from God his rightful honor and due. Paul also includes the lack of rendering of thanks to God. Paul equates the honor of God with the action of latreu,w, which is the level of action in which honor and worth is rendered to God, and which is what we argue worship entails. Paul understands that latreu,w can be offered to something other than God, but Paul shows that it is ultimately an illegitimate use of latreu,w, which according

DESCRIPTION OF PAULINE WORSHIP IN LIGHT OF LANGUAGE

| 81

to him constitutes idolatry. The abuse and improper practice of latreu,w leads to idolatry, which is the placing of God within the category of the created order, and assimilating him to the sphere of the creature. We also argued that Paul saw the practice of placing the creature or created things in the place of the creator results in an imbalance of the proper paradigm of worship. The proper referent or object of latreu,w for Paul is God, and only God, and the basis for this legitimization in Rom 1:21, 23, 25 is the identity of God as creator.72 The root of idolatry for Paul is the refusal to honor God as God, and to transfer such honor to created things, thus making them improper objects of latreu,w by way of idols. We note here that the criteria for worship seems to fit well with our findings. We have humanity who are the human subjects who are supposed to honor God the object of worship, by exercising the level of action of latreu,w to him. Paul argues that humanity has rebelled against God by exercising latreu,w to created things, instead of its rightful object: God. In so doing they have violated the proper paradigm of worship between the creature (subject), and creator (object). Paul shows here that latreu,w is a word belonging to a religious context which expresses a level of action of religious service to God which can be properly termed “worship.”

4.1.3. Philippians 3:3 h`mei/j ga,r evsmen h` peritomh, oi` pneu,mati qeou/ latreu,ontej kai. kaucw,menoi evn Cristw/| VIhsou/ kai. ouvk evn sarki. pepoiqo,tej / “For we are the circumcision, who serve by the Spirit of God, and boast in Christ Jesus and who have no confidence in the flesh”

We have addressed this passage already in the context of criteria for proper worship.73 We will examine the use of latreu,w in this text. It has been noted according to David M. Stanley that this passage contains a triadic orientation to God, the Spirit, and Christ.74 Stanley argues that worship to God in Paul is animated by the Holy Spirit and is expressed by the faith community in and through union with the risen Christ.75 Paul brings out a number of qualifying markers on worship which include (true) circumcision, the worship of God by the Spirit of God, boasting or glorying in the risen Jesus and putting no confidence in the flesh. In this passage, Paul begins by presenting a contrast between his worshipping community and another party which he refers to as “the dogs,” “evil workers” and “those who mutilate the flesh” (Phil 3:2).76 The reference to those who “mutilate the flesh” is a caricature by Paul of the Judaizers or Judaizing faction in the Philippian community77 where the mutilation of the flesh is according to Louw and Nida, “an exaggerated reference to peritomh, ‘circumcision.’”78 The NASB translates this phrase “beware of the false circumcision.”79 In contrast to this party,

82

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

Paul asserts concerning his worshipping community, h`mei/j ga,r evsmen h` peritomh, / “For we are the circumcision.”80 In using the first person plural pronoun h`mei/j, Paul includes himself (as is usually his custom) with his worshipping community. The pronoun h`mei/j is also in the emphatic position.81 The implication here is that the worshipping community is the true circumcision.82 Paul’s mention of the worshipping community being the (true) circumcision carries with it connotations of worship. The idea of circumcision is based on the concept of covenant which in a religious context is a personal relational term between God and his people where the latter affirm their allegiance to the deity.83 In referring to the worshipping community as h` peritomh, / “the circumcision,” Paul is employing this term according to Peter O’Brien as a collective noun;84 in short, Paul is speaking of the whole Christian worshipping community. Paul is also demonstrating that they are in true covenant with God, in a two-way personal relationship with God. In identifying the Christian believers as “the circumcision” or the true circumcision, Paul is implying that they are consequently the true descendants of Abraham and hence by contrast the Judaizers are not, and thus they do not render true worship to God by being outside of the covenant which bears the true circumcision. Paul sees the spiritual antagonism of the Judaizers as contrary to the gospel message that he preached and taught, and hence the rituals of the Judaizers accordingly were deemed by Paul to have lost their significance.85 Paul appears to assert here that only the Christian community truly worships God, they are the one true people of God,86 and by process of elimination the Judaizers are out. In contrast to the Christian community which is the true circumcision, the Judaizers are described by Paul as the mutilators of the flesh;87 in short, they are the false circumcision and hence the false worshippers. This is a very sharp and stinging charge by Paul.88 Paul refuses to call the Judaizer the circumcision.89 We note here that most English versions of Phil 3:3 translate latreu,w as “worship” whereas in Rom 1:9, 25 they mostly translated it as “served.” The Douay-Rheims, HCSB version, and Monsignor Knox’s NT version translate latreu,w in Phil 3:3 as “serve,” and the Vulgate uses “servimus.” The difference in translating latreu,w as “worship” or “serve” in the English various translations indicates a preference by the various translators. The words worship and serve are acceptable but the latter is a more literal translation denoting religious service. We note again that Paul had no specific word for “worship” as we have in English. To understand the use of latreu,w as “worship” in Phil 3:3 as most translations do, necessitates criteria to establish what worship is and entails. We note that in Phil 3:3 we have the subjects who are the worshippers (Paul and the Philippian Christians), the direct object is implicitly God, and the level of action is latreu,w, which is religious service to God. According to my criteria, we have here a religious context where a human

DESCRIPTION OF PAULINE WORSHIP IN LIGHT OF LANGUAGE

| 83

subject(s) expresses a level of action to a divine object all of which establishes that worship occurs. The means by which they worship God is oi` pneu,mati qeou/ latreu,ontej / “who worship God in spirit” (RSV) or “who worship in the Spirit of God” (NRSV), or “who worship by the Spirit of God” (ESV).90 Worship is presented here in experiential terms in that worship is experienced in or by the Spirit of God, and not necessarily on religious observance.91 The Spirit of God facilitates worship or service to God. In referring to his worshipping community, including himself, as the true circumcision, Paul possibly has in mind here the internal circumcision of the heart.92 This pneumatic emphasis on worship is seen elsewhere in Paul.93 Paul perceived Christian worship to be, in the words of Ralph Martin, “essentially inward and spiritual,”94 but this appears to be an over generalized statement. Worship for Paul appears to be both inward and outward in its expressions. Paul also expected his communities to live out their faith as well in practical ways as we shall see. Paul includes latreu,w, religious service in Phil 3:3, as one of the characteristics among others of what it is to be the true circumcision.95 In addition to latreu,w, he adds two other characteristics, namely, that of boasting in Christ Jesus and putting no confidence in the flesh. The description of the faith community as those who “glory in Christ Jesus,” or perhaps better, “boast in Christ Jesus” (NRSV, NAB),96 appears to find its source in the OT reference to boasting in one’s knowing God (LXX Jer 9:23–24).97 Fee argues Paul is implying the same in Phil 3:3 in his reference to boasting in Christ Jesus.98 The idea of boasting in the Lord according to the LXX Jer 9:23–24 rests in “knowing the Lord.”99 For Paul, the ku,rioj is his favorite appellation for Jesus. To boast in the Lord for Paul is to boast in Jesus. The content of boasting here is “Christ Jesus,” and the act of boasting denotes according to Louw and Nida the acknowledgment of someone or something as “noteworthy.”100 In speaking of Christian believers as those who boast Christ Jesus Paul will go on to argue that he has no grounds for self-boasting (Phil 3:7–10), for he considers everything as loss because of the surpassing value of knowing Christ Jesus his Lord (gnw,sewj Cristou/ VIhsou/ tou/ kuri,ou mou / “knowing Christ Jesus my Lord”; Phil 3:8). The OT reference to boasting in the Lord (LXX Jer 9:24) also speaks of the content of the boasting which is ginw,skein o[ti evgw, eivmi ku,rioj / “knowing that I am the Lord.” It is possible that Paul may have this passage in mind and that he takes the ku,rioj to be Jesus. The fact that Paul uses language such as that of knowing Christ (Phil 3:8), and wanting to know Christ (Phil 3:10), implies that Paul believed that he had, and was in a personal relationship with the risen Jesus. By making reference to the risen Jesus as the one in whom Christian believers boast, he is associating and bringing the risen Jesus into the foray of Christian worship. We noted that in Rom 1:9 above Paul did something similar in identifying his latreu,w to God as involving his proclamation of the gospel

84

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

of God’s Son. Here in Phil 3:3 we see the risen Jesus associated closely with the latreu,w that is given to God. Another characteristic Paul mentions regarding the faith community is that they put no confidence in the flesh which includes “human status, privilege, or achievement.”101 This may also indicate that they do not rely on human strength or human worth.102 This may be an ironic blow against Paul’s opponents who pride themselves in the flesh probably by way of physical circumcision, which would lead to claims about special covenant status and privilege.103 O’Brien makes the interesting observation that Paul’s use of sa,rx / “flesh” in Phil 3:3 may carry “an incidental allusion to circumcision.”104 If so, this probably highlights Paul’s understanding of circumcision in this text as a spiritual one as we noted above. In this way, Paul reiterates the ultimate and total dependence of the worshipping community on God from whom they obtain their confidence and status. In conclusion, Phil 3:3 Paul makes a number of important remarks about the qualifications of the worshipping community. He notes that they are the circumcision, which evokes covenantal overtones and which implies a religious relationship between the worshipping community and God. He then states that he and the Philippian believers are those who perform latreu,w by the Spirit of God, which is religious service to God. While God is not directly mentioned in Phil 3:3, he is the implied object to whom religious service is rendered. We are told rather how or in which manner they render latreu,w that is by the Spirit of God. We see here again the aspect of worship in terms of what latreu,w seeks to communicate, namely, service to God. This is for Paul only one aspect of worship because Paul does not restrict himself solely to latreu,w when he deals with the subject of worship. This seems to support our hypothesis that Paul did not have one specific word for “worship” but a series of words. The word latreu,w is one picture in the overall mosaic of worship and it highlights as we noted the aspect of service to God. Paul also states in this text that they the worshippers of God, or those who are in service to God, also boast in the risen Jesus and put no confidence in the flesh. In boasting in the risen Jesus, Paul shows that the risen Jesus is closely associated and related to the worship of the faith community. Paul presents four important descriptions of the faith community according to Phil 3:3. First, he implies here by reference to the true worshippers of God being the circumcision that this must involve implicitly a changed or circumcised heart while also communicating the idea of covenant where the worshippers stand in relationship to God. The relational aspect is an important element in the worship paradigm. Secondly, that true and legitimate worship must be exercised by or in the Spirit of God. Thirdly, if there is anything to boast of, it is as Paul has asserted only in Christ Jesus. Fourthly, they put no confidence in the flesh because they understand God to be the source of all they are and have, and in this respect the ultimate dependence and total submission of

DESCRIPTION OF PAULINE WORSHIP IN LIGHT OF LANGUAGE

| 85

the worshipper on God is expressed. Here we see Paul employing and motivating a series of pictures to communicate what a relationship with God entails. The use of latreu,w denotes worship on the basis of the criteria we have used in this study. Paul sees latreu,w here as communal in that he includes himself with the worshipping community as collectively exercising latreu,w. This indicates that latreu,w has a communal use as well as an individual use for Paul as we saw in Rom 1:9. The use of latreu,w in Phil 3:3 also suggests that Paul saw this word as having a mainly religious function in that the implied referent is God. According to the proposed criteria, worship is presented in Phil 3:3.

4.2. latrei, a We will examine the noun latrei,a and observe its usage in the context of Rom 9:4; 12:1.

4.2.1. Romans 9:4 oi[tine,j eivsin VIsrahli/tai w-n h` ui`oqesi,a kai. h` do,xa kai. ai` diaqh/kai kai. h` nomoqesi,a kai. h` latrei,a kai. ai` evpaggeli,ai / “who are Israelites who have the adoption and the glory and the covenants and the giving of the law and the service and the promises.”

Rom. 9:4 is the first place in Romans where Paul uses the noun latrei,a. This text appears in the wider context of a passage where Paul is addressing his anguish and sorrow over his people in their rejection of Jesus as the Messiah (Rom 9–11). The immediate text of Rom 9:4 appears in a brief discussion of a series of privileges that were given to the people of Israel among which Paul includes the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the service, and the promises. To this list in Rom 9:5 Paul adds the patriarchs, and it ends with what appears to be a climatic reference to the fact that from them the Messiah also came. BDAG defines latrei,a as “in cultic usage service / worship (of God).”105 This noun is also used in Greek literature for the religious service or worship of the gods.106 Here as we saw with the verb latreu,w, the context in which the noun latrei,a appears is that of religious service to God. Some English translations render it “service”107 and others “worship.”108 This service is religious in nature as it has God as its implied referent in Rom 9:4 and hence denotes worship. Some translations such as the KJV and NKJV understand God to be the implied referent of latrei,a in Rom 9:4 and thus add the italicized phrase into the English text so that we have “the service of God.” Among the privileges given to the people of Israel was that to them was given h` latrei,a. This word also conveys religious service such

86

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

as that found in the tabernacle and temple.109 For this reason, several translations of Rom 9:4 render it “the temple service” (NASB), and “the temple worship” (NIV, NET). The word “temple” does not appear in Rom 9:4, but a number of translators see it as an implicit ingredient.110 Moo comments that latrei,a in Rom 9:4 can function in both a wide and narrow scope. In its wider application, it could refer generally to the worship of Israel. In its narrower scope it would refer to the sacrificial system expressed through the temple cult. 111 The temple worship evokes sacerdotal categories. Paul for instance uses priestly language when he refers to himself as offering up the Gentiles to God as an acceptable offering. He states in Rom 15:16 that he was called, eivj to. ei=nai, me leitourgo.n Cristou/ VIhsou/ eivj ta. e;qnh i`erourgou/nta to. euvagge,lion tou/ qeou/ i[na ge,nhtai h` prosfora. tw/n evqnw/n euvpro,sdektoj h`giasme,nh evn pneu,mati a`gi,w | / “to be a minister of Christ Jesus to the Gentiles in the priestly service of the gospel of God, so that the offering of the Gentiles may be acceptable, sanctified by the Holy Spirit” (NRSV). The noun leitourgo,j according to Strathmann “also moves in the realm of priestly and cultic ideas,”112 and Barclay states that this noun also later came to refer to “worship and service rendered in the temple of the gods.”113 The way Paul employs the term in conjunction with other words in Rom 15:16 indicates a priestly and cultic connotation as he describes his offering up of the Gentiles to God.114 By this language Paul is showing according to Moo that he intends to describe his ministry to the Gentiles as specifically a priestly ministry.115 The idea of offering in this case denotes a religious act in which God becomes the object or recipient of the offering, and in this case, worship occurs according to my criteria. The offering of the Gentiles is sanctified (h`giasme,nh) by the Holy Spirit thus indicating something that has been set apart for God as its main object.116 In offering the Gentiles to God, Paul is in effect worshipping God. It is interesting that in Rom 15:16 Paul associated his priestly service of the gospel of God with that of the offering of the Gentiles. Here Paul says something similar to what we saw in Rom 1:9 where he states that he worships or serves God in the proclamation of the gospel of God’s Son. Paul associates the gospel with his acts of worship to God. This is supported by Paul’s use of the verb i`erourge,w, a Pauline hapax legomenon that carries the meaning of to “perform holy service, act as a priest.”117 The priestly and cultic context which Paul seeks to communicate is amplified by his use of the noun prosfora,, which is defined as “that which is offered to God in religious activity—‘offering, sacrifice.’”118 As an Israelite (Rom 9:3, 11:1; 2 Cor 11:22; Phil 3:5) Paul also shares in the privileges that has been given to the nation of Israel which includes h` latrei,a, the worship of God. As a member of the covenant people, Paul sees himself as a worshipper of the true God. It is the worship of the God of Israel that Paul has brought and introduced to his communities who were former idolaters, and who

DESCRIPTION OF PAULINE WORSHIP IN LIGHT OF LANGUAGE

| 87

had turned to serve the true and living God (1 Thess 1:9; 1 Cor 6:9–11). In this case, it can be said that membership has its privileges.

4.2.2. Romans 12:1 Parakalw/ ou=n u`ma/j avdelfoi, dia. tw/n oivktirmw/n tou/ qeou/ parasth/sai ta. sw,mata u`mw/n qusi,an zw/san a`gi,an tw/| qew/| euva,reston th.n logikh.n latrei,an u`mw/n / “Therefore I appeal to you brothers by the compassions of God to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy, well-pleasing to God, this is your reasonable service.”

In this passage, Paul makes an appeal to the faith community by the compassions or mercies of God that they present their bodies as a living sacrifice, which is to be holy and well-pleasing to God, and which he summarily defines as their logikh.n latrei,an / “reasonable service.”119 We note here that the three levels of the criteria for worship appear to be present. Paul identifies the subject(s) who are the Roman Christians, he identifies the object to whom they are exercising the level of action, namely, God (tw/| qew), and he defines their level of action in presenting their bodies as living sacrifices as logikh.n latrei,an / “reasonable service.”120 In this text, we see the idea of religious service (latrei,a), which is an aspect of worship being described in terms of believers presenting their bodies as a living sacrifice, as holy and acceptable to God. The idea of latrei,a is also seen here as a direct act towards or facing God. It is also placed in concrete terms in that it speaks of the body of the worshipper metaphorically as a sacrifice in terms of its total submission to God;121 nevertheless, it is a living sacrifice and thus is an on-going sacrifice. It is also to be holy and acceptable. Here Paul shows what latrei,a involves. It is an active expression of service to God by surrendering oneself in total submission and unconditionally.122 Here we encounter a glimpse of what latrei,a is communicating: service to God in absolute and total submission. This is not all of worship but is one aspect of it. This is also the first time in Romans where Paul employs the noun latrei,a in association with a metaphor, namely, that of sacrifice. Paul is taking one of the pictures from the mosaic of worship to communicate an important feature of worship that involves the aspect of religious service. Here we see Paul recognizing the level of action of the subject (the worshipper) to the object (the worshipped) as an essential and definitive element of worship. Moo advocates the rendering of the GNT, which renders logikh.n latrei,an as “true worship.”123 Thus Paul views worship as containing these three levels: subject- level of action—object. Philo of Alexandria uses the adjective logiko,n used by Paul here when he speaks of “the purity of the rational spirit of the sacrificer” who worships God in the offering of sacrifices.124 Philo also views the level of action of sacrificing as a necessary element for worship. Like Paul, Philo also has the subject

88

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

(“the sacrificer”), and the implied object (God), and the level of action (sacrifices). Like Paul, Philo also qualifies the level of action by pointing to the purity of the spirit of the sacrificer. Sacrifice is only legitimate if it proceeds from a pure heart, a notion present in the Pastorals (2 Tim 2:22) which we have examined above.125 Anyone can perform sacrifice as an outward ritual act, but this does not necessarily constitute worship.126 What is necessary is that the act of sacrifice proceeds from a pure heart with sincere intentions towards God. Paul thus calls on the Roman Christians to properly present their bodies as living sacrifices which are to meet the qualifications of being holy and acceptable to God. That Paul regards worship as important and central is seen in his appeal where he mentions “the compassions of God.” Paul shows that God has been compassionate or merciful to the Roman Christians, and as a result they should show their appreciation to him in service by fully surrendering to him.127 Paul tells them to present their bodies as a “living sacrifice,” which is to be “holy and well-pleasing to God.” We encounter language here that is associated with a religious context, namely, that of sacrificing and this indicates that worship is in view. Paul here is adopting the use of metaphor in speaking of Christian believers in their relationship to God, which we will address shortly. Closely associated with sacrificing is the temple. We noted above that in Rom 9:4 the word latrei,a most likely refers to temple worship. Paul does not mention the temple in Rom 12:1 even though language of sacrifice is implicitly connected to the temple. The notion of presenting (parasth/sai) is derived from the OT Levitical system of presenting to YHWH the sacrificial victim alive (Lev 3:7; 16:9, 11, 20; 23:18). Moo and Dunn argue that Paul in this passage is borrowing the language of the Levitical system in which animal sacrifices are replaced by Christians in “an eschatological transformation of the OT cultic ministry.”128 Thomas Schreiner also asserts that the word pari,sthmi is a sacrificial term and that Paul appears to be borrowing the language of the OT.129 While Moo, Dunn, and Schreiner are correct to note that Paul is borrowing the language of the Levitical system in Rom 12:1, the word itself which Paul employs, pari,sthmi, is not used in the LXX for sacrifice. It does appear, according to Cranfield, “as a technical term for offering sacrifice in extra-biblical Greek.”130 It is attested in Josephus (J.W. 2.89; Ant. 4.113), Polybius (Hist. 16.25.7), and Lucian (Sacr. 13). That Paul is using the language of sacrifice in Rom 12:1 is clear nonetheless and the language of sacrifice infuses the context with a religious meaning which has worship intended as well. The relationship between sacrifice and worship is attested in Josephus when he records the emperor Vespasian’s accession to the throne and remarks that upon hearing the news kai. pa/sa me.n po,lij e`w,rtazen euvagge,lia Îde.Ð kai. qusi,aj u`pe.r auvtou/ evpete,lei / “upon which every city kept festivals, and celebrated sacrifices and oblations for such good news.”131 Josephus uses

DESCRIPTION OF PAULINE WORSHIP IN LIGHT OF LANGUAGE

| 89

the same word for sacrifice qusi,a that Paul uses in Rom 12:1. Josephus does not mention the object of these sacrifices whether it was Vespasian or the Roman gods, but the language of sacrifice and oblation is clearly religious.132 The Roman writer Virgil fondly wrote of the emperor Augustus that he was “a god who wrought for us this peace—for a god he shall ever be to me; often shall a tender lamb from our folds stain his altar.”133 What should be noted here in Virgil’s comments is the relationship between the identity of the emperor as “a god” and his right to receive sacrifices on “his altar,” which is indicative of worship. Sacrifices are given to divine objects and function as a level of action in a religious context. Virgil is expressing his worship of the emperor as “a god” by means of a level of action, namely, sacrifice. The offering of sacrifices is an expression and act of worship indicating the servanthood and dependency of the worshipper on the object being worshipped. An important element within the notion of sacrifice is the idea of complete and total submission to God. This metaphor thus powerfully brings out the idea of latrei,a as service to God, which is to be understood as total surrender. The notion of sacrifice is intimately tied to the context of worship. In the OT, sacrificing to YHWH was indicative of worship by his people (Exod 10:25). When such sacrifices were offered up to gods other than YHWH, this constituted the worship of those gods.134 The penalty for offering up sacrifices to any god other than YHWH according to the Mosaic law was utter destruction, implying death (Exod 22:20).135 Thus to engage in the act of sacrifice is to worship God or a god, so that to sacrifice = to worship. When Paul calls on the Roman Christians to offer their bodies (cf. themselves; Rom 6:13) as living sacrifices to God, he is essentially calling on them to worship God by way of complete and total service to him. The act of sacrifice communicates not only the vulnerability of the worshipper but also absolute and total submission to God, and thereby acknowledging one’s utter dependence on God.136 We also observe in Rom 12:1 a double metaphor. While the metaphor of sacrifice appears to be explicit in the text in that Paul uses the term qusi,a, there is also an implicit metaphor where the worshipper is likened to a priest.137 In sacrifice an animal is offered up by another, namely, the priest, whereas in the case of Paul he calls on the Roman Christians to offer up their bodies as a living sacrifice to God (parasth/sai ta. sw,mata u`mw/n / “to present your bodies”). While the sacrifice was typically offered by the worshipper to God as an act of worship itself, Paul collapses the distinction between the sacrificer (the worshipper), and the sacrifice itself, and fuses the two into one so that the worshipper becomes both sacrificer and the sacrifice at the same time.138 We noted above how Paul perceived himself in the service of a priest in his offering up of the Gentiles to God (Rom 15:16). Here Paul seems to be calling on believers to fulfill both metaphors, to function as priests in offering up their bodies as sacrifices to God with the qualifications that they be both holy

90

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

and acceptable. Paul is borrowing sacerdotal language. As priests they approach God ready and willing to serve him with the utmost submission conveyed by the idea of sacrifice.139 The worshipper in this case becomes both priest and sacrifice. While metaphor is used by Paul in Rom 12:1 to illustrate the sacrifice of believers to God in terms of similarity to animal sacrifices there are also differences. In Rom 12:1, we also note that the type of interpretative metaphor employed by Paul is that of a surface metaphor. A surface metaphor as Jan van der Watt has shown is a “basic metaphor” in which both the “tenor” and the “vehicle” is provided in the text.140 In Rom 12:1, the tenor is “your bodies” and the vehicle is “sacrifice.” The tenor (“your bodies”) here is taken as the literal referent while the vehicle (“sacrifice) is taken as the metaphor or analogy which compares the tenor with the sacrifices of the OT. In the use of metaphor, the literal meaning of a given idea or thing is always granted first. In other words, the literal meaning of a word or thing is primal before a metaphorical application is exercised. In order for the metaphor to be properly effective, it must refer back to the literal meaning of the word and emphasize a particular aspect that can be extrapolated from the literal referent and applied to the contrasting idea or word. As Van der Watt has argued, the metaphor must also have a social-historical context to it.141 The use of the metaphor by Paul in Rom 12:1 would be superfluous unless it had some sense of meaning to his readers. In this respect, the metaphor has a communicative force in that the writer uses the metaphor to convey a particular message to the reader by highlighting a point of similarity in the words under discussion. In the case of Rom 12:1, it is “your bodies” and “sacrifice.” When Paul appeals to the metaphor of sacrifice, his readers would have been familiar with it either from a Jewish or Greco-Roman perspective. Paul refers to the sacrifices by the worshipping community as a “living sacrifice,” which from the standpoint of the OT is an oxymoron since sacrificial victims were slaughtered.142 Paul states that it is the bodies of the Roman Christians that should be offered as living sacrifices. Barclay notes that this language of presenting one’s body as a sacrifice is not typical of Greek thinking, which tended to see the body as vile and evil, as a shackle or prison.143 Paul, however, regards the body metaphorically as the temple of the Holy Spirit (1 Cor 6:19–20).144 Elsewhere, Paul also speaks of believers offering their very selves to God (Rom 6:13; cf. NEB, “your very selves”),145 and a number of scholars have noted the connection in thought between Rom 12:1 and Rom 6:13.146 Paul uses the same verb pari,sthmi in Rom 6:13 as he does in Rom 12:1 for the presenting of believers to God. The body is possibly being used here as a synecdoche for the whole person147 as Paul probably seemed to view the human as a composite entity.148 Paul is applying the metaphor in comparing the bodies of Christian believers to a sacrifice, to be more precise, “a living sacrifice.”149 Wright makes an important observation in pointing out that another possible reason Paul makes reference to the body (sw/ma) of believers in

DESCRIPTION OF PAULINE WORSHIP IN LIGHT OF LANGUAGE

| 91

Rom 12:1 is because of the resurrection, which will be the future redemption of the body (cf. Rom 8:23). Wright comments: “it [the body] will be raised, and this makes it appropriate as the locus of present Christian worship and service.”150 The basis and guarantee of this future belief in resurrection according to Paul is the past resurrection of Jesus himself (cf. 1 Cor 15:20–23). Paul is making here a comparison between the body of the Christian believer and the animals (be they sheep, goats, or bulls according to the Levitical law) offered up in sacrifice.151 Paul does not equate a human being with an animal, and this clearly is not the intent of his metaphor. While sacrifice is the metaphor, the intended meaning is the same, namely, that of sacrifice as complete surrender and offering to God. Another important point of comparison as we have seen is that the reference is to the sw/ma. In the OT sacrifice, it was obviously the body of the animal that was offered up in sacrifice to God. Similarly, Paul calls on the Roman Christians to offer up their bodies as well. Paul clearly does not equate the two as the same body because as we noted above Paul does not equate a human being with an animal. What is the common denominator between the two is the sacrifice or act of absolute surrendering. In the ancient world, the giving up of one’s body for another, usually a superior, indicated complete surrender. Xenophon notes that the allegiance which was paid to the Persian king Cyrus was so great among his followers that they were willing to entrust to him both their treasures and cities and ta. e`autw/n sw,mata / “their very bodies.”152 Thus the metaphor of offering up the body in sacrifice applies in terms of total and complete surrender to God.153 Barth notes that “sacrifice means surrender . . . it means an unconditional gift.”154 As Witherington also notes: “God does not want something from us; he wants us.”155 The only point again of reference or similarity which is relevant to Paul is that he wishes to imply in his metaphorical reference to sacrifices the central point of surrender, and being holy and pleasing before God. Paul, however, also considers the Christian believer to be dead to sin, but alive to God (Rom 6:1–14),156 but in this passage Paul does not evoke the imagery of sacrifice as he does in Rom 12:1. In using the metaphor of sacrifice, Paul shows that the worshipper is first and foremost helpless and thus completely dependent on God. As an offered up sacrifice Paul shows that the Christian worshipper comes to God and stands before the one they serve, empty handed, and absolutely vulnerable, and at his mercy. In the case of animal sacrifice in the OT, the animal was also completely helpless and absolutely vulnerable to another, namely, the priest who would slaughter it and offer it up in sacrifice. In a similar vein, the Christian worshipper is also helpless (outside the mercy of God, which Paul also mentions in Rom 12:1) and ultimately vulnerable to another, in this case, to God himself. Dunn makes an interesting observation concerning the Pauline faith communities, that they “looked to no cult

92

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

centre or temple; they had no priests, no sacrifices.”157 All of these terms seemed to have been appropriated metaphorically by Paul to the worshipper so that the worshipper becomes the temple (1 Cor 3:16–17; 6:19–20; 2 Cor 6:16–18; Eph 2:21–22); they could use the language of priesthood, which Paul metaphorically uses of himself (Rom 15:16)158 or implicitly of believers who function as priests in this case in offering their bodies to God (Rom 12:1), and thus the faith community becomes the sacrifice themselves (Rom 6:13; 12:1). This concept does not appear to be unique to Paul as Philo also viewed the worship of the worshipper as the essence of sacrifice itself.159 The concept of a “living sacrifice” is also attested in the OT (Ps 51:17).160 The idea that the worshipper can be the sacrifice itself can also be seen in the Second Temple Jewish text of the Prayer of Azariah and the Song of the Three Young Men, a section which while absent in the Hebrew text of Daniel appears in the Greek LXX as an addition to Daniel.161 This text relates the prayer of the three Hebrew men Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego when they were thrown into the fiery furnace (cf. Dan 3:12–28). The text states in the Prayer of Azariah 1:16–17 (LXX Dan 3:39–40; Theodotion): 39av l lV

evn yuch/| suntetrimme,nh| kai. pneu,mati tapeinw,sewj prosdecqei,hmen w`j evn o`lokautw,masin kriw/n kai. tau,rwn kai. w`j evn muria,sin avrnw/n pio,nwn 40 ou[twj gene,sqw qusi,a h`mw/n evnw,pio,n sou sh,meron kai. evktele,sai o;pisqe,n sou o[ti ouvk e;stai aivscu,nh toi/j pepoiqo,sin evpi. soi, 16Yet

with a contrite heart and a humble spirit may we be accepted, as though it were with burnt offerings of rams and bulls, and with tens of thousands of fat lambs; 17such may our sacrifice be in thy sight this day, and may we wholly follow thee, for there will be no shame for those who trust in thee (RSV).

In this text Azariah prays on behalf of his two friends and appeals that God accepts them because of their contrite heart (lit., contrite soul) and humble spirit, which bears some resemblance with the wording in Ps 51:17 (Ps 51:19 MT) as noted above. They are in a fiery furnace, which highlights the fact that their lives are in mortal danger, and Azariah prays that God may deliver them from this situation (cf. 1:20). He asks that God accept them in their contriteness and humility as though (w`j) they were burnt offerings of rams, bulls, and tens of thousands of fat lambs. He compares their heartfelt attitude as a qusi,a h`mw/n / “our sacrifice” before God. Azariah also links this sacrificial giving to God with faithful obedience in total submission to God as he asks that they would “wholly” follow him (1:17). Azariah further asserts that there will be no shame to those who trust in God. This shows that God is faithful and will not shame his servants. We note here a number of similarities with Paul’s language in Rom

DESCRIPTION OF PAULINE WORSHIP IN LIGHT OF LANGUAGE

| 93

12:1. Paul calls on Christian believers to offer or present their bodies as living sacrifices to God. Azariah and his friends also offer themselves up as “living” sacrifices to God in the fiery furnace and appeal to their contrite heart and humble spirit as a substitutes for sacrifice. Both Paul and Azariah use the technical word qusi,a for “sacrifice.” The aspect of sacrifice as complete and total submission to God is also seen as we have seen in Azariah’s plea that they “wholly” follow him (1:17). Paul also employs the language of sacrifice to reinforce the idea of total and complete submission to God and the surrendering of one’s very life to God on a daily basis as they are to be “living sacrifices.” Azariah also asks that their sacrifice be accepted by God sh,meron / “this day” or “this very day” indicating a complete and total submission to God in their present situation. While Paul focuses on the body, Azariah focuses on the internal heart and spirit. Paul also commands complete and whole submission to God (Rom 6:13). Paul commands that the sacrifice of the Roman Christians be “acceptable” before God. Azariah also asks that they as a sacrifice also be “accepted” before God. Paul regarded the concept of sacrifice as not necessarily requiring the death of the subject but in order to say this he must employ the use of metaphor to emphasize a particular aspect of sacrifice which he wishes to convey.162 The idea of a living sacrifice as opposed to a dead (animal) sacrifice is that the latter can only be offered up once because it dies in the process of sacrifice. The former on the other hand can be offered up numerous times as the same subject because it remains alive and does not die in the process of sacrifice. A living sacrifice, which is the expression Paul employs, communicates the notion of a continuing act of surrender and the relinquishing of one’s rights to God. In calling on believers to offer their bodies as living sacrifices, Paul is extending, in Moo’s words, “the sphere of the cultic into every dimension of life.”163 Paul also qualifies the nature of this sacrifice by means of two words, a[gioj / “holy” and euva,restoj / “well-pleasing” or “acceptable” (KJV, NKJV, ASV, NASB, ESV). In so doing, Paul is qualifying the level of action. These are words associated with the notion of sacrifice. In Rom 15:16, which we noted above, Paul compares his ministry to that of a priest who offers the Gentiles as an offering to God and he uses similar language that we find in Rom 12:1. He states that this offering of the Gentiles has been h`giasme,nh / “sanctified” (“made holy”; NLT) or set apart by the Holy Spirit to be dedicated to God.164 He also states that he desires that this offering will be euvpro,sdektoj / “acceptable”165 implicitly to God. Paul understands that a legitimate sacrifice must be both holy and acceptable or pleasing to God. In qualifying the element of sacrifice by these terms, Paul is indicating that God does not just accept any sacrifice but only sacrifice which is holy and acceptable to him.166 In using the first term, a[gioj, to describe the living sacrifice in Rom 12:1, Paul seems to be deriving this notion from the OT. Various sacrifices and

94

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

offerings in the OT are described as a[gioj / vd,qo / “holy” to YHWH (Lev 6:24–25, 29; 7:1, 6; 14:13). The command for sacrifice to be holy calls to mind the idea which the word “holy” conveys, that of being set aside or set apart, consecrated, dedicated to God for his service.167 Paul tells the Roman believers not to be conformed to the world (Rom 12:2). The call to be holy therefore implies the personal relational aspect in worship where the servant is called to render allegiance and service to the one who has set him or her apart.168 The second qualification for this sacrifice is that it is to be euva,restoj. While this word can mean “acceptable,” it can also be translated as “well-pleasing” or “pleasing.”169 The concept of pleasing God in relation to sacrifice is also rooted in the sacrificial language of the OT where offerings that were presented to YHWH are described as a pleasing aroma.170 Paul seems to show in this metaphor that God is pleased when his people serve, honor, and acknowledge him, in full surrender.171 The believer as a sacrifice belongs to God first and foremost as his consecrated property so to speak. The sacrifices in the OT were also seen as being the property of YHWH, and therefore they were “holy” or set apart for him (cf. Lev 6:25).172 In summary, Paul identifies in Rom 12:1 the three levels of worship that we noted in our definition and criteria of worship. He mentions the subjects (the worshippers) who are the Roman Christians, the object (God), and the level of action, which is their presenting their bodies as living sacrifices to God. Paul qualifies this level of action as something that must be both holy, and acceptable, or pleasing to God, thereby indicating that true worship must be qualified. Paul identifies this level of action as their spiritual or reasonable worship or service. Paul employs a double metaphor here. While he speaks of the reasonable service of the Roman Christians in presenting their bodies as a living sacrifice that is holy, and acceptable to God, Paul at the same time calls on them to exercise the action of offering up such a sacrifice. In so doing he is implicitly borrowing the imagery of a priest. Various translations render latrei,a as either “worship” or “service.” Both are permissible translations, but the latter is a more literal translation. The English word worship is used in some translations because it is understood that the service described here is religious service to God, which communicates what the English word worship conveys. Paul, however, does not use any one word for “worship.” What we observe rather is Paul employing one word, latrei,a, to communicate one aspect in the overall picture of worship, which in this case is that of service to God. This service is described in terms of a metaphor of sacrifice that vividly communicates notions of absolute surrender and total submission to God while at the same time being an on-going act of service as it is described as a living sacrifice. Paul also touches on the quality of service that is rendered. It is not just any form of service to God; it must be holy and acceptable to God, which implies that there are some forms of service which would be unacceptable to God.

DESCRIPTION OF PAULINE WORSHIP IN LIGHT OF LANGUAGE

| 95

If a blemished sacrifice was offered, it was unacceptable.173 Here Paul qualifies the notion of worship: it must be holy and only in this case would it be acceptable to God. We see here a parallel with 2 Tim 2:22, which we noted above also qualifies that the one who calls on the name of the Lord must do so from a “pure heart.” We thus see in Rom 12:1 implicit qualifications for what should constitute reasonable service to God. There is a religious context in Rom 12:1 evidenced in the language of sacrifice, that being holy and acceptable to God. There are human subjects who are in a personal religious relationship to a divine object to whom they express their devotion and dependence by a level of action wherein they present their bodies (cf. Rom 6:13; themselves) as living sacrifices. Paul uses the power of metaphor to communicate a specific aspect of sacrifice, namely, that of complete and total surrender and service to God which is to be on-going since they are to be living sacrifices. The underlying current in this text is that latrei,a communicates essentially service to God in absolute terms. Paul sums this up by defining this relationship and level of action as their logikh.n latrei,an / “reasonable service.”

4.3. seba, z omai Another word Paul uses in Rom 1:25 which denotes worship is seba,zomai, which is a Pauline hapax legomenon.174

4.3.1. Romans 1:25 oi[tinej meth,llaxan th.n avlh,qeian tou/ qeou/ evn tw/| yeu,dei kai. evseba,sqhsan kai. evla,treusan th/| kti,sei para. to.n kti,santa o[j evstin euvloghto.j eivj tou.j aivwn/ aj avmh,n / “Who exchanged the truth of God for the lie and reverenced and served the creature rather than the creator who is blessed forever. Amen.”

The sole appearance of this word in Rom 1:25 also indicates and supports our contention that Paul did not have or use one standard word for “worship.” There was no univocal Greek word for worship in Paul’s grammatical apparatus. The word seba,zomai is only one word among a series that Paul utilizes and communicates one aspect in the mosaic of worship. Since we have dealt extensively with the surrounding context of this passage above175 when we examined latreu,w, we will only deal with the word seba,zomai and its meaning in Rom 1:25, but we will also examine its use alongside of latreu,w. The word seba,zomai is defined as “to express in attitude and ritual one’s allegiance to and regard for deity—‘to worship, to venerate.’”176 BDAG defines it as “to show reverence to, worship.”177 Thayer

96

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

defines it as “to honor religiously, to worship.”178 The word is traced to the Greek root se,baj, which means “reverence” and “awe”179 or “reverential awe.”180 Homer uses it to mean “to fear, be afraid.”181 The meaning of “reverence” and “awe” thus seems to be attached to this word in a religious context. Seba,zomai also carries with it a religious meaning in that the ideas of reverence and awe are generally associated with the greatness and grandeur of the divine. This word implies a personal and positional relation between the worshipper and God. God is to be reverenced mainly because his lofty status and identity brings awe to the worshipper. The identity of God and the awe he imposes on the worshipper was a central element as we saw in Otto’s understanding of the “numinous” in the human experience of worship.182 The idea of ontological distance is also implicit here by the idea of awe, which seba,zomai communicates as a response by the worshipper to the vast greatness of God.183 In using this word, Paul may have had the notion of the “awesomeness” of God in mind when he speaks of God as creator (cf. Rom 1:20, 25) and shows the folly of humanity in exchanging the glory of God for that of images of creatures. In so doing, they failed to show proper seba,zomai, reverence or fear of God.184 In Rom 1:25 as we already noted, Paul employs two words that denote worship: seba,zomai and latreu,w, and this is the only time he combines two words describing worship in a sentence. Most translations of Rom 1:25 render seba,zomai as “worshipped” and latreu,w as “served.”185 This, however, seems to be arbitrary and selective on the part of the translators and implies that one word has the meaning of worship and the other does not. This can be misleading as both these words in a religious context can denote worship. Other translations reverse the meaning so that, according to the NAB, seba,zomai and latreu,w are respectively translated as “revered and worshiped.” The NT translation of Monsignor Knox similarly translates it as “reverencing and worshipping,” while the NEB and REB renders it “reverence and worship.” This, however, presents the same problem as we saw in the majority of translations, implying that one word means worship and the other does not. J. B. Phillips in his NT translation renders these words as “paying homage and giving service.”186 Still other translations like the CEV do not translate these two words at all but combine them into only one word “worshiped,” which tends to eliminate the particular nuances of these two words Paul used. These differences in translation demonstrate the difficulty even among translators in properly understanding and rendering words for worship. The difficulty in dealing with these two words in Rom 1:25 is seen in Foerster when he asserts that seba,zomai is used in a general application of worship and latreu,w is used specifically for worship in terms of “serving” God.187 Moo thinks that Paul uses seba,zomai perhaps “to add a ‘pagan’ connotation to the first verb,” 188 and Byrne thinks it refers to “religious veneration in general.”189 Both of these

DESCRIPTION OF PAULINE WORSHIP IN LIGHT OF LANGUAGE

| 97

assumptions are unnecessary and very unlikely. It is necessary to go to the meanings of these words to understand Paul’s intention in using them. The Berkeley version190 appears to translate these words in Rom 1:25 more accurately as “revered and served.”191 We have also rendered these words in our translation of Rom 1:25 above as “reverenced and served.” This communicates clearly what Paul is attempting to say. Paul combines two verbs that denote a level of action in a religious context which communicate the sense of reverence or awe and religious service to God. That Paul would use these two words only in Rom 1:25 seem to indicate that he is emphasizing a point. We noted that Paul uses seba,zomai only once in the context of Rom 1:25, a passage where Paul strongly denounces idolatry and argues that the reverential awe and religious service that people render to idols is misplaced and that this reverential awe and religious service rightly belongs to and should only be rendered to God. Why does Paul use a word like seba,zomai that denotes reverence or awe to God? We suggest as a possibility that he does so because he has argued that the wrath of God has been revealed from heaven against all wickedness (Rom 1:18), part of which includes the degeneration of humanity’s decline into idolatry. We noted above that Homer used seba,zomai to communicate the notion of fear.192 Is it possible that when Paul uses the word seba,zomai he may be alluding to the idea of the fear of God? The fear of God (fo,boj qeou/; LXX Prov 1:7) also carries with it connotations of reverence for God. Louw and Nida note that one of the definitions of fo,boj is “profound respect and awe for deity—‘reverence, awe.’”193 We noted that seba,zomai also carries the idea of reverence and awe. Paul also uses this phrase (fo,boj qeou/) later in his letter (Rom 3:18).194 Could Paul be suggesting that rather than fearing God or rendering seba,zomai (reverence, awe) to him, humans showed reverence and awe to created things instead, thus heightening the degree of their wickedness? As Moo notes Paul is arguing that people who rebel against God are showing a lack of the fear of God.195 A lack of the fear of God is a lack and absence of showing reverence for God. Paul quickly goes on to vindicate God’s sole right to receive this reverence and awe. This reverential awe for God should elicit a response of religious service from the worshipper. Paul shows here that reverence, awe, and religious service to God go together. In summary, the verb seba,zomai is a Pauline hapax legomenon that appears in Rom 1:25 within a context where Paul is strongly denouncing idolatry. This word carries the meaning of reverential awe or to honor religiously. In a religious context, this word communicates the sense of awe that the worshipper experiences when relating to the deity. This particular word used by Paul brings to the surface another important aspect of worship, another picture from the whole mosaic of worship. It communicates the notion of reverence and awe towards God. In the context of Rom 1:25, seba,zomai is something that should be done towards God, which is rendering reverence and being in awe of him. This word focuses on the

98

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

aspect of showing respect and honor for God while also communicating an element of allegiance. The idea of honor is an important element in worship. In the social-cultural world of Paul, honor and shame were the standards of ethics and status.196 Neyrey notes: “Honor refers to the claim of worth, value, and respect that must be publicly acknowledged.”197 Many of these values such as honor, reverence, praise, blessing, and thanks functioned in the ancient world as synonyms, so these words could function interchangeably.198 Ultimately, the attribution of these values to God was intended to acknowledge and affirm his identity in terms of his characteristics as creator, provider, sustainer, and savior. In a religious context the attribution of honor to God is an act of worship. In this respect, seba,zomai highlights the aspect of reverence or honor to God. We have also seen that seba,zomai may possibly carry the notion of fear, which was seen as closely associated with reverence. The unbeliever according to Paul has no fear of God (Rom 3:18), which he believes a worshipper of God should have (2 Cor 7:1). The contribution of the word seba,zomai as an aspect of worship is in bringing forward the notion of reverence and honor for God. Paul combines seba,zomai with latreu,w in Rom 1:25, and this is the only time that Paul joins two words used in a religious context to express one’s relationship to God. It is very possible that Paul combines these two words in Rom 1:25 for the purpose of emphasis in order to highlight the utter degeneration of idolatry in which people render reverential awe and religious service to created things rather than to the proper referent who is God the creator. Most translations render seba,zomai with latreu,w as “worshipped and served,” but this diminishes the importance of the meaning of these words and their particular nuances. Paul had no univocal word for “worship” as we do in English. Both seba,zomai and latreu,w are separately translated “worship” in English translations (e.g., Rom 1:25; Phil 3:3). The better rendering of these words we suggest is to translate them as “revered” and “served” as the Berkeley version does or as “reverenced and served,” and this seems to be Paul’s intention. He seeks to show that idolatry is the reverencing and serving of created things when in fact the act of reverencing and serving (religiously) belongs solely to God. Both of these acts (reverencing and serving) constitute worship, and the reason for this is that they principally meet my criteria. The context is religious, the subjects are humans, the direct object in the case of idolatry are images of beings that humans have accorded divine status. The level of action is that of reverencing and religious serving. Paul corrects this misplaced paradigm and states that the level of action of reverencing and serving by human subjects should be given only to God. Paul’s use of seba,zomai as a hapax legomenon further indicates and confirms our position that Paul did not have one standard word for “worship.” Rather Paul employed various words as he does in Rom 1:25 with seba,zomai and latreu,w and

DESCRIPTION OF PAULINE WORSHIP IN LIGHT OF LANGUAGE

| 99

used these words to communicate a comprehensive understanding of what it is to relate to God by means of various levels of action. It is this personal religious relationship and the level of action involved from the human subject(s) to the divine object that constitutes “worship.”

4.4. proskune, w Another word employed by Paul for worship is the verb proskune,w. BDAG defines proskune,w as a word describing submission to another: it designates “the custom of prostrating oneself before persons and kissing their feet or the hem of their garment, the ground.”199 Thayer also defines proskune,w as “to kiss the hand to (towards) one, in token of reverence . . . to fall upon the knees and touch the ground with the forehead as an expression of profound reverence.”200 The aspect of submission and dependence is inherent in proskune,w as the action of this verb is used “to express in attitude or gesture one’s complete dependence on or submission to a high authority”201 BDAG also gives as the meaning of proskune,w “(to fall down and) worship, do obeisance to, prostrate oneself before, do reverence to, welcome respectfully.”202 This word is used in Hellenistic texts to express the adoration of the gods,203 and that of the statues of the gods,204 as well as showing honor and respect to a human person of greater status such as a ruler.205 Xenophon records that Cyrus received proskune,w from his subjects.206 In the LXX, proskune,w is used of the worship of God but also that of gods and / or idols (LXX Dan 3:5–7, 10–12, 18). It is also used of showing honor and respect to angels (LXX Gen 18:2; 19:1),207 and of honoring monarchs (LXX 1 Sam 24:9; 1 Kgs 1:16, 23, 31), and governors (LXX Gen 37:9–10; 42:6; 43:26, 28). Thus both in the Hellenistic and biblical texts, proskune,w can be used of both a human person and a superhuman entity. This indicates that proskune,w must be interpreted by the context as to whether it indicates worship or honor and obeisance to a human of high status. Josephus agrees with the LXX and writes that proskune,w can be used of the worship of God, gods, while also being used to express honor and respect to men of high status such as rulers or monarchs.208 Philo also understands proskune,w to mean honor and respect when human referents are in view.209 This verb appears only once in the Pauline letters (1 Cor 14:25), and hence it is a Pauline hapax legomenon. It is interesting that while proskune,w appears only once in Paul’s writings it tends to be the dominating verb elsewhere in the NT when it comes to the subject of worship.210 We note here that proskune,w implies a relationship between an inferior or minor and a superior or major. The subject in this context is dependent on the object and the subject expresses his or her dependence by way of a level of action or medium which can include prostration, kissing the feet, reverencing a

100

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

superior, and so forth. Complete dependence and submission to a higher authority is implicit in the verb proskune,w. We thus have the three criteria which we outlined at the outset of this research, the question is whether we have a religious context to ground proskune,w in a worship setting. In order to assess this we have to examine the referents or objects of the verb proskune,w. The referents of proskune,w according to BDAG are divided into two main categories, human beings and transcendent beings. They are broken down as follows:211 1. 2. 2a. 2b. 2c. 2d. 2e.

human beings212 transcendent beings (God or gods) monotheistic deity (God) image worship in polytheistic cult the devil and Satanic beings angels the risen Lord

The list above from BDAG also shows that the referents of proskune,w can be different, they can be human beings as in category 1 or supernatural entities as in category 2. While the word proskune,w can carry the meaning of worship to God, it also can be used as we have noted above in BDAG contextually to designate reverence and obeisance to humans such as monarchs and rulers, or even as a gesture of respect.213 In this case proskune,w is a multivalent word with a number of meanings attached to it based on its referent or object. It does not always mean worship as we have seen in BDAG and Louw and Nida. In order for proskune,w to fit the criteria regarding worship, it must appear in a religious context where the object is a supernatural entity.

4.4.1. 1 Corinthians 14:25 ta. krupta. th/j kardi,aj auvtou/ fanera. gi,netai kai. ou[twj pesw.n evpi. pro,swpon proskunh,sei tw/| qew/| avpagge,llwn o[ti:Ontwj o` qeo.j evn u`mi/n evstin / “the secrets of his heart will be made manifest and he will fall upon his face and will bow down to God declaring that ‘God is really among you.’”

We will explore the use of proskune,w in this text and see if it fits into the criteria for worship. The context of this passage appears to be a religious one. The subject is a human being (the unbeliever),214 who exercises the level of action (bowing down, confessing), towards the object who is God. In this text, proskune,w appears in a context in which God is the direct object. The singular appearance of proskune,w by Paul in 1 Cor 14:25 as we have already noted above is a hapax legomenon, and this should alert us to the fact that proskune,w was not the only word

DESCRIPTION OF PAULINE WORSHIP IN LIGHT OF LANGUAGE

| 101

available for Paul to denote worship, nor the one and only defining term for “worship.” Considering the numerous uses in the LXX and the rest of the NT use215 of proskune,w for the worship of God, it is surprising that Paul only employs this word here in 1 Cor 14:25. The wider context of 1 Cor 14 is clearly that of communal worship which takes up a significant part of the Corinthian correspondence (1 Cor 11–14) so that the appearance of proskune,w in verse 25 seems to be soundly placed in a worship setting. Paul is dealing in 1 Cor 14 with two spiritual gifts in the church, namely, the gifts of prophecy and tongues.216 The idea that in 1 Cor 14 we can observe a worship service in session so to speak is noted by Morris: This little paragraph [1 Cor 14:26–33] is very important as giving us the most intimate glimpse we have of the early church at worship . . . it is our earliest account of a service and it enables us to see something of what the first Christians actually did when they assembled to worship God.217

Paul describes an unbeliever entering into the worship gathering of the Corinthian faith community and hearing the congregation prophesying and being convicted by what he hears and being called to account by all (1 Cor 14:24). What is interesting is that Paul in his single use of proskune,w applies it not to a Christian believer in the faith community, but to an unbeliever who is convicted by hearing prophetic utterances and responds by doing proskune,w. In 1 Cor 14:25, Paul not only uses proskune,w but further qualifies it with the phrase pesw.n evpi. pro,swpon. This phrase is translated “will bow down” in the NRSV, but this “loses [the] force” of the expression.218 The NIV renders it, “will fall down,” but it literally means “falling on his face” (RSV, ESV; cf. KJV, ASV, NJB, NASB, NET). This expression appears as an idiomatic Semitism or Hebraism attested in the OT in the context of worship and reverence in the immediate presence of YHWH219 and carries the notion of giving homage.220 David Garland also states that “falling on one’s face is an attitude of worship . . . and an acknowledgment of unworthiness.”221 Barrett comments that to fall on one’s face “bears witness to a profound sense of unworthiness as well as the immediate presence of God.”222 The expression to fall down, or fall down on one’s face, is usually connected to and coupled with the verb proskune,w as we see in 1 Cor 14:25.223 The combination of falling on one’s face and offering proskune,w to God heightens the surrender, and submission, and thankfulness of the convicted unbeliever to God. The phrase pesw.n evpi. pro,swpon and the noun proskune,w both appear to carry the notion of downward motion such as falling upon one’s face, and falling on one’s knees, thus highlighting an action of subservience to a superior. Fee notes that “[t]his is biblical language for obeisance and worship.”224 This appears to be, as Robertson and Plummer have noted, a “spontaneous expression of submission and thankfulness.”225 Here we note that Garland, Barrett, Fee, Robertson and Plummer’s definition of proskune,w as

102

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

worship appears to fit with the criteria. They see the act of falling on one’s face as “an attitude,” “an acknowledgment of unworthiness,” “a profound sense of unworthiness,” in the “immediate presence of God,” that this is “biblical language for . . . worship” and an “expression of submission and thankfulness.” Here they describe the second point in my criteria, that of the level of action or medium what Garland calls “an attitude” that expresses the relationship of the subject (the worshipper), to the worshipped object (God). The level of action also communicates the important element of acknowledgment both of the object (the worthiness of God), and the subject (the “unworthiness” of the worshipper). The sense of unworthiness heightens the idea of debt that the worshipper owes to God, and this sense of debt leads to one’s submission to God, while at the same time being thankful to him. The act of falling on one’s face and proskune,w also evoke the idea of being in the presence of God. We noted above226 that the worshipper engages in various actions to indicate his or her inferiority and dependence on God. One of those actions as we have just noted, is prostration (proskune,w) and falling on one’s face. These actions are taken in a metaphorical application in that the worshipper exercises these actions as if God were in fact visibly and / or symbolically present before him or her as a human magistrate or human monarch would be. In the case of 1 Cor 14:25, it is God who is the heavenly monarch. One of the natural reactions in the presence of a monarch would be to prostrate oneself, or bend the knee, in essence, to perform proskune,w. This demonstrates the level of action which the subject uses to render honor and respect to the monarch, a practice which continues even in the present day when one is in the presence of a state monarch. Thus worship entails an awareness of the presence of God in the worshipping community. Worship as Humphrey has argued, also involves not only the awareness of the presence of God in the faith community, but conversely, worship also involves the faith community’s entering into God’s presence.227 Humphrey argues persuasively for the latter. The motif of God’s presence as a basis for worship is an important one, but we would argue that this is only one among many motifs employed by Paul to explain and describe worship. The responsive attitude of the worshipping community is for the worshippers to acknowledge God’s presence in their midst by exercising a level of action in which they express their surrender, submission, and loyalty to God in various ways. These expressions can be visible, audible, and verbal. In 1 Cor 14:24–25, Paul alludes to all three of these actions: 1. 2. 3.

Audible (v. 24): the unbeliever hears Christian worshippers prophesying, and as a result is convicted228 Visible (v. 25): the unbeliever falls on his face and prostrates, reverences, worships God Verbal (v. 25): the unbeliever declares / confesses “God is really among you”

DESCRIPTION OF PAULINE WORSHIP IN LIGHT OF LANGUAGE

| 103

A text that contains some grammatical similarity with 1 Cor 14:25 is that of Sir 50:17, to,te pa/j o` lao.j koinh/| kate,speusan kai. e;pesan evpi. pro,swpon evpi. th.n gh/n proskunh/sai tw/| kuri,w| auvtw/n pantokra,tori qew/| u`yi,stw| / “then all the people together quickly fell to the earth upon their faces to bow down to their Lord, the Almighty, God Most High.”

Sirach 50 is recounting in glorious terms the high priestly duties of Simon son of Onias in the temple. This passage contains a worship context where religious duties and expressions are carried out by both Simon and the people of Israel. In this text the people are described as falling to the earth upon their faces (e;pesan evpi. pro,swpon) to bow down or render proskune,w to God. Both the RSV and NRSV translate proskune,w as “worship” in Sir 50:17 while the NJB translates it “adoration.” This is the same order we find in 1 Cor 14:25, the act of falling upon one’s face, and then bowing down to an intended object in both cases: God. The only difference is that the subject in 1 Cor 14:25 (the unbeliever) is singular whereas in Sir 50:17 the subject is an intended plural, namely, the people (o` lao.j). The appearance of these same expressions in a religious context in Sir 50:17, which we have also examined in 1 Cor 14:25, suggests that these acts are usually associated with worship to God. Paul introduces the declaration and confession of the unbeliever by way of the conjunction o[ti, in this case we have a hoti recitativum where direct discourse is introduced by means of a quotation,229 in this case: Ontwj o` qeo.j evn u`mi/n evstin / “God is really among you.” There is an emphasis here as we noted on the presence of God in the worshipping community. The presence of God is a perquisite element in worship for the act of worship presupposes that a divine object is being addressed and honored. We note Barrett’s comment above that falling on one’s face, which action Paul combines with proskune,w also involved “a profound sense of . . . the immediate presence of God.”230 This demonstrates according to Paul that the action of falling on one’s face and proskune,w is a response to an awareness of the presence of God. Paul also implies here that God is present with his people in their worship gatherings so much so that even unbelievers under conviction will vouchsafe that reality. The exposure of the state of the heart of the unbeliever is discovered to be a divine act which is attributed to God. The end result of the gift of prophecy is that the unbeliever comes to worship God by recognizing his presence in the Christian worshipping community.231 What is probably being mentioned in this text according to Witherington is a conversion of an unbeliever.232 While this is probable the text is not altogether clear on whether conversion is explicitly in view here. What seems to be Paul’s point in 1 Cor 14:24 is that the unbeliever is convicted not so much converted. If Paul

104

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

wanted to communicate the notion of conversion at this point, he could have used the verb evpistre,fw, which according to Louw and Nida means “to change one’s belief, with focus upon that to which one turns—‘to turn to, to come to believe, to come to accept.’”233 Paul uses the verb evpistre,fw in 1 Thess 1:9 to describe how the Thessalonians turned from idols to serve a living and true God. A. J. Malherbe argues that Paul uses the language of conversion in 1 Thess 1:9.234 We will discuss 1 Thess 1:9 in the next section. If conversion is in view in 1 Cor 14:25, Paul could have supplied the verb evpistre,fw, but he does not. It is also possible that the reaction of the unbeliever due to conviction in this case is one of fear. The reaction is one of prostrating or bowing down and falling on one’s face which appears to be more the case of acknowledging God’s presence in the community. Thiselton notes that the word avpagge,llw / “to declare” in 1 Cor 14:25 “denotes the declarative speech-act of . . . worshiping acknowledgment.”235 The text seems to suggest that the unbeliever is convicted of his or her sin and acknowledges God by prostrating and falling on his or her face as well as confessing God’s presence in the faith community. It is not altogether clear if the unbeliever in this case has become a Christian believer, although the possibility remains open.236 The reality and emphasis of the presence of God within the Christian community is implied in the exclamation of the unbeliever that Ontwj o` qeo.j evn u`mi/n evstin / “God is really among you” (1 Cor 14:25). We have already emphasized above Paul’s motif of God’s presence with the worshipping community by way of the temple metaphor (1 Cor 3:16–17; 6:19–20; Eph 2:21–22), which also included the notion of God walking and moving among the worshipping community (2 Cor 6:16).237 Here Paul seems to be showing that there is a clear corelation between God’s presence and the act of worship itself. It is possible according to some scholars that the language Paul employs in 1 Cor 14:25 may be taken from the OT238 in two passages, LXX Isa 45:14 and LXX Zech 8:23.239 Both of these passages speak of the uniqueness of God and the repudiation of other gods or idols. They also contain conversion themes, including an emphasis on the presence of God being with his people. If these texts are alluded to by Paul, then these passages appear to be deliberately cited because they are supportive of Paul’s polemical arguments in which he repudiates various forms of idolatry and calls for allegiance to God, including conversion of Gentiles from idols to God (cf. 1 Thess 1:9; 1 Cor 12:3). When 1 Cor 14:25 is placed alongside of LXX Isa 45:14240 and LXX Zech 8:23,241 we note an interesting parallel feature. (The relevant phrases are in bold): 1.

1 Cor 14:25

ta. krupta. th/j kardi,aj auvtou/ fanera. gi,netai kai. ou[twj pesw.n evpi. pro,swpon proskunh,sei tw/| qew/| avpagge,llwn o[ti :Ontwj o` qeo.j evn u`mi/n evstin / “the secrets of his heart will be

DESCRIPTION OF PAULINE WORSHIP IN LIGHT OF LANGUAGE

| 105

made manifest and he will fall upon his face and will bow down to God declaring that ‘God is really among you.’” 2.

LXX Isa 45:14

proskunh,sousi,n soi kai. evn soi. proseu,xontai o[ti evn soi. o` qeo,j evstin kai. evrou/sin ouvk e;stin qeo.j plh.n sou/ / “[They will] bow down to you. They will make supplication to you, saying, ‘God is with you alone, and there is no other; there is no god besides him.’” 3.

LXX Zech 8:23

poreuso,meqa meta. sou/ dio,ti avkhko,amen o[ti o` qeo.j meqV u`mw/n evstin / “Let us go with you, for we have heard that God is with you.”

The first passage, Isa 45:14, speaks of the vanquished nations who are unbelievers or non-Jews coming to restored Israel and confessing that God is with them, while also denying that there is any other god but Israel’s God. Garland notes that the confession that God is among the Corinthian believers in 1 Cor 14:25 is “the confession of the vanquished,”242 in this case idolaters are conquered by God to whom they now owe ultimate allegiance. Blenkinsopp notes that in Isa 45:14 there is both a confession that YHWH is the only God, and that there is a theme of conversion.243 If this text of Isa 45:14 lies behind 1 Cor 14:25, it is possible we have a conversion theme for in both of these texts it is the unbeliever who is the subject who comes to acknowledge the true God (cf. 1 Thess 1:9). However, there is a notable difference for while 1  Cor 14:25 will speak of the unbeliever worshipping God, in LXX Isa 45:14 it is restored Israel that receives proskune,w from the vanquished nations. What Paul seemed to be interested in, if indeed he had LXX Isa 45:14 in mind which we cannot be absolutely certain that he did, was the assertion that “God is with you.” This is the only point of agreement between LXX Isa 45:14 and 1 Cor 14:25. LXX Isa 45:14 demonstrates that the verb proskune,w can also have a human referent(s) without implying worship as we have already noted above.244 The act here of proskune,w denotes attributing honor to a conquering nation (Israel), and since the relationship is not a religious one but is rather a political one, it cannot be properly called worship.245 Klaus Baltzer thus sees the theme of Isa 45:14 as that of the homage of the foreign peoples to restored Israel.246 Greeven, however, blurs the important distinction between the use of proskune,w in a religious context with that of a political / social context when he states: “What is appropriate to God is also appropriate to His elect.”247 The honor that is given to God is not the same honor given to his people, for it is the distinction between God and his people that serves as the basis for worship and attributing to him the honor that is uniquely his. When proskune,w is used with God (or

106

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

gods) as the referent or object the context is religious and worship occurs. When proskune,w is used of humans (except those who claim divine status such as the Roman emperor), it denotes a political or social context where honor is rendered. Thus Greeven’s criterion here is not helpful. This passage comes from a polemical section in Isaiah with striking emphasis on the uniqueness and oneness of Israel’s God against all other gods and idols.248 Paul shares this same sentiment as he also makes a sharp important distinction between God and idols (1 Cor 8:4–6). The second OT passage, LXX Zech 8:23, envisions a time when the nations shall seek to know God and make supplication before him (LXX Zech 8:20–23), and they will come to the Jews to seek knowledge of God because they know that God is with them. We note that the point of similarity with 1 Cor 14:25 is that of the unbeliever(s) recognizing the true God. The presumption here again is that God is with his people and thus his presence provides the context for worship as we have seen in 1 Cor 14:25. The context of worship can be established since the nations are said to come and make supplication to God and to seek his face (LXX Zech 8:21), expressions that are indicative of worship. The themes of conversion and the presence of God are evident in this text. Meyers and Meyers note that the theme in Zech 8:20–23 is that of the nations turning or converting to God.249 If Paul did have LXX Zech 8:23 in mind, the main portion of the text he was interested in was that of God being with his people. Thus the only point of agreement between LXX Zech 8:23 and 1 Cor 14:25 is the declaration or confession that God is truly among his people who are his worshippers. Thus we see again a co-relation between the presence of God and worship. Another act although not as strong as pesw.n evpi. pro,swpon in 1 Cor 14:25, is that of “bowing the knees” in Eph 3:14, Tou,tou ca,rin ka,mptw ta. go,nata, mou pro.j to.n pate,ra / “For this reason I bow my knees to the Father.” The bowing of the knees is seen as an act of complete submission and dependence to a superior, who in this case is God “the Father” and who is the object of this relational act. This is seen in the grammatical construction pro.j to.n pate,ra where the Father is the object (to.n pate,ra is accusative), and the preposition pro.j when used with the accusative can indicate movement towards and hence can imply a relationship.250 The child-parent relationship is seen in Eph 3:14 where God is viewed as “the Father.” As father, God is owed honor, respect, and acknowledgment, and these are expressed in the bowing of the knees, which denotes a dependence by the worshipper, as the child to the parent, who is God “the Father.” The act of kneeling or bowing in worship is rooted in the OT (1 Kgs 8:24; Ezra 9:5), and is attested elsewhere in the NT (Luke 22:41; Acts 21:5). To summarize, the word proskune,w is used only once by Paul in 1 Cor 14:25. The sole appearance of this word in 1 Cor 14:25 which is a significant word for worship elsewhere in the NT (e.g., Matthew, John, Revelation),251 and the LXX,

DESCRIPTION OF PAULINE WORSHIP IN LIGHT OF LANGUAGE

| 107

indicates that Paul was not influenced by any one word for “worship,” or at least he did not have one particular word for “worship” as found for instance in modern English. Worship was not a monadic or univocal word in the Greek language that Paul used in communicating to his faith communities. In employing the word proskune,w, Paul is using a word that brings out an aspect of worship, namely, that of submission and dependence. The verb proskune,w means to prostrate oneself, to fall upon the knees, to touch the ground with the forehead. All of these actions cumulatively communicate gestures of submission and surrender. We have spoken of worship as involving among other things, the element of complete and total submission, and the word proskune,w brings this particular point to the surface. This word by its very expressive nature also demonstrates an element of external worship in the sense that it involves bodily gestures such as prostration and bowing, which can be visually seen. Of all the words for worship we have surveyed thus far, proskune,w is the only word that carries with it an external gesturing action. This indicates that Paul would have understood an aspect of worship as involving a bodily posture indicating total submission and surrender to God. We also noted that proskune,w has a number of meanings depending on the referent or object to which it is rendered. We noted that proskune,w can be rendered both to humans of a high status (monarch, governors, rulers), or to spiritual beings (God, gods). Thus this term is not restricted to only a religious context as it can also be used in a social-political context as well. This demonstrates that the context is crucial for the proper meaning of proskune,w. According to my criteria, we have argued that worship is only realized in a religious context, and since Paul employs proskune,w in a religious context in 1 Cor 14:25 with God as its direct object, we conclude that worship is clearly intended by Paul. This is further substantiated by Paul when he inserts the idiom pesw.n evpi. pro,swpon / “falling on his face,” which is also used for honoring prominent human beings, but since it appears in 1 Cor 14:25 in a religious context, it is clearly intended to carry the meaning of worship. We also note that 1 Cor 14:25 fits the criteria for worship, which we have outlined at the beginning of this research.252 We have the subject who is the unbeliever, we also have the level of action in which worship is realized, namely, the prostrating, bowing and reverencing which is communicated by proskune,w, and finally we have the object of worship who is God.253 A co-relative element in the worship of God as we have seen is also an emphasis on the presence of God. The assertion :Ontwj o` qeo.j evn u`mi/n evstin / “God is really among you” in a context of worship reinforces the notion that God is truly present among his worshippers, a point Paul made in his temple metaphors in 1 Cor 3:16–17; 6:19–20; 2 Cor 6:16–18; Eph 2:21–22. We noted that it is possible that Paul may have had LXX Isa 45:14 and LXX Zech 8:23 in mind, particularly with the confession or declaration of the unbeliever that God is among his people,

108

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

although Paul does not explicitly cite these texts. While it appears that 1 Cor 14:25 may be suggesting a conversion of an unbeliever, the text is not altogether clear on this. Paul does not use the word here that carries the meaning of conversion as he does in 1 Thess 1:9. What seems to be certain is the degree of conviction that the unbeliever experiences and thereby reacts by doing proskune,w. Even if we do not consider these OT texts and lay them aside, the point has been established by Paul that God is present among his worshippers, and thus he forges a co-relation between worship and the presence of God. The act of proskune,w is a visible demonstration of one’s submission and surrender to God who is believed to be present in the worshipping community.

4.5. douleu, w Another word that Paul uses in his language of worship is douleu,w, which is defined as to “be a slave, be subjected . . . serve someone as a slave, serve,”254 and “to be a slave of someone.”255 BDAG defines douleu,w as “to be owned by another” and “to act or conduct oneself as one in total service to another.”256 This verb is very wide in its semantic range in that it can carry a number of objects as the referents of service. It appears a total of seventeen times in the Pauline corpus.257 BDAG lists at least three categories of objective referents for the verb douleu,w.258 The following list which I have compiled demonstrates the wide semantic range of douleu,w. The verb douleu,w can apply to service rendered to: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13.

earthly masters (1 Tim 6:2) a younger sibling by the older sibling (Rom 9:12) a nation by another nation in bondage (Gal 4:25)259 false gods / idols (Gal 4:8 cf. 1 Cor 12:2) governmental authorities (Rom 13:1–7)260 elemental spirits (Gal 4:9) sin (Rom 6:6)261 various passions and pleasures (Titus 3:3) one another (Christian believers; Gal 5:13) ministry in the gospel (Phil 2:22) the law of God (Rom 7:25) Jesus (Rom 12:11; 14:18; 16:18; cf. Col 3:24) God (1 Thess 1:9)

In the above categories we observe in each one a servant-master relationship. Paul sees himself in a servant-master relationship as he refers to himself as Pau/loj( dou/loj VIhsou/ cristou/  / “Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ” (Rom 1:1; cf. Gal 1:10; Phil 1:1).262 It is interesting that in these letters Paul calls himself a servant of Jesus

DESCRIPTION OF PAULINE WORSHIP IN LIGHT OF LANGUAGE

| 109

rather than a servant of God. David MacLeod states that Paul viewed himself as being a servant of God and Jesus as the same.263 In the Pastoral text of Titus 1:1 we have the phrase, Pau/loj dou/loj qeou/ avpo,stoloj de. VIhsou/ Cristou/ / “Paul, a servant [or slave, NAB, NLT, NET] of God and an apostle of Jesus Christ.” Here Paul is identified as “a servant of God.” To be a servant of Jesus would also be synonymous with being the servant of God who sent him; in this case to serve Jesus would also translate into serving God. The language and relationship of servant-master while also evident in Greco-Roman literature is also derived from the OT where notable figures are given the honorific title “slave” or “servant” of YHWH,264 as in the Hebrew hw"÷hy>-db,[, and the LXX dou/loj kuri,ou and paidi. kuri,ou.265 It was considered an honor to be the servant of the deity, particularly in the biblical context.266 Paul also viewed his faith communities collectively as servants of Christ and thus the servant-master relationship can also be taken collectively as servantsmaster. Paul thus views the church collectively as God’s servant and its individual members as “slaves of God” (Rom. 6:22 RSV).267 The paradigm of servant-master which defines the relationship of the worshipper and God later becomes the standard model for the earthly paradigm in the Haustafeln,268 the household codes in the later Pauline letters. In these letters, earthly masters are called upon to treat their slaves justly, and fairly, on the basis that these earthly masters also have a Master in heaven (Col 4:1).269 At this point I wish to examine the use of douleu,w and assess whether it has any relation to the subject of worship in the Pauline letters. The first text to be examined is 1 Thessalonians 1:9–10.

4.5.1. 1 Thessalonians 1:9–10 9

auvtoi. ga.r peri. h`mw/n avpagge,llousin o`poi,an ei;sodon e;scomen pro.j u`ma/j kai. pw/j evpestre,yate pro.j to.n qeo.n avpo. tw/n eivdw,lwn douleu,ein qew/| zw/nti kai. avlhqinw/| 10 kai. avname,nein to.n ui`o.n auvtou/ evk tw/n ouvranw/n o]n h;geiren evk Îtw/nÐ nekrw/n VIhsou/n to.n r`uo,menon h`ma/j evk th/j ovrgh/j th/j evrcome,nhj 9 For

they themselves report concerning us what sort of entrance we had to you, and how you turned to God from the idols, to serve a living and true God,10 and to wait for his Son from the heavens whom he raised from the dead, Jesus who rescue us from the wrath that is coming.

This passage in particular comes from what some scholars hold to be the earliest of Paul’s letters, 1 Thessalonians.270 Some scholars also hold that 1 Thess 1:9–10 is perhaps a pre-Pauline formula,271 which if so, would place its source even earlier than the writing of 1  Thessalonians itself. The idea that verses 9–10 reflect a pre-Pauline confession has received “severe criticism” by most

110

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

commentators.272 As noted above we will not concern ourselves with the subject of source criticism in Paul.273 In this passage, Paul remarks on how he has received favorable reports from the regions of Macedonia and Achaia (1 Thess 1:7–8) of his reception and those of his colleagues among those in Thessalonica. Among the reports is the fact that the Thessalonian believers had turned to God from idols,274 to serve a living and true God and to wait for His Son from heaven whom he raised from the dead, and who saves believers from the divine wrath to come. The mention of idols with the living and true God here seems to reflect an OT influence on the part of Paul.275 When these descriptions are appropriated to God (“true” and “living”) in the OT and Second Temple Jewish texts, they are usually done so in the polemical context of repudiating idolatry and paganism. It should be noted here that the infinitive verb douleu,ein from douleu,w is used by Paul to express the service which the Thessalonian believers render to God. The context of 1 Thess 1:9–10 does not explicitly address the issue of worship, as Paul is not directly dealing with worship. If Paul wanted to express more clearly the idea of worship, he could have utilized the verb latreu,w, a word which appears in mainly religious contexts and which carries the idea of to “render cultic service.”276 Paul elsewhere used latreu,w as we saw to describe his religious service and that of Christian believers to God including the rightful religious service humans in general should render to God (Rom 1:9; 25; Phil 3:3; cf. Rom 12:1).277 Paul could also have used other words such as seba,zomai (Rom 1:25), and proskune,w (1 Cor 14:25), to express worship to God. Ernest Best has questioned why Paul would use the verb douleu,ein of God in 1 Thess 1:9 claiming that the verb douleu,ein is usually used by Paul in reference to Jesus (Rom 12:11; 14:18; 16:18; Col 3:24).278 Paul uses the verb douleu,ein deliberately here of God to emphasize a change in masters. What appears in the passage seems to be rather a description of a general transition, how the Thessalonians turned from idols, and turned to God.279 The passage appears to be descriptive instead of prescriptive. Paul is not commanding the worship of God here, but describing what happened to the Thessalonians in terms of their turning or conversion to God from idols. The language of turning to God is noted by Malherbe as untypically Pauline as he only uses it here,280 and so we seem to have a unique text here. The use of the prepositions employed here by Paul seem to indicate the transitory nature which the passage describes. Paul asserts the Thessalonian believers turned pro.j to.n qeo.n, the preposition pro.j with the accusative indicating movement towards,281 the object being God also indicated by the accusative case. They turned avpo. tw/n eivdw,lwn from idols where the preposition avpo. with the genitive indicates movement away from. Louw and Nida also point out that avpo, also functions as “a marker of dissociation, implying a rupture from a former association-from, separated from.”282 James Frame

DESCRIPTION OF PAULINE WORSHIP IN LIGHT OF LANGUAGE

| 111

interestingly puts it: “In facing God, they turned their backs on idols.”283 What we encounter therefore in 1 Thess 1:9 appears to be a transition of associations, or a change from one lord or lords (idols) to another lord (i.e. God), from one master to another. The Thessalonian believers have changed masters; they were once serving idols, but now they serve a new master who is God. Frame comments that they have “exchanged a slavery to idols for a slavery to God,”284 which indicates a transition. This transition can also be seen as conversion which implies a change from one category to another. Malherbe notes that Paul is using the language of conversion here285 indicated in a change from idols to God.286 This transition can be set out as follows: Before

After

serving idols

serving God

lifeless idols

living God

false gods

true God

In this contrast, the transition of service from one category to another is clearly seen. It has moved from serving idols to serving God. The contrast is further deepened by way of comparing the idols with God. Although not explicit, the lifelessness of the idols is implicit as they are contrasted with the living God the Thessalonians have come to now serve.287 Moreover, it is implied that the idols are also false (gods) as they are contrasted with the true God. The present participle zw/nti and adjective avlhqinw/| in reference to God appear to be employed by Paul in a polemical fashion and are meant to function as antonyms in contrast to the idols. Malherbe notes that the phrase “living God” is usually “used in polemic to distinguish God from idols.”288 The Thessalonian believers have transferred their allegiance in service from the idols to God. While the immediate context of 1 Thess 1:9 describes a general transition as we have seen from service to idols to service to God, the verb douleu,w in this text has been taken by some to designate worship as well. Ernest Best acknowledges that while douleu,ein can mean worship in 1 Thess 1:9, he nevertheless states that “serve is not to be restricted to worship but means service in every aspect of life.”289 Best appears vague here because he does not seem to place douleu,w here in its proper specific context, which is that of idols and God. Charles Wanamaker is correct to state that “[t]his evidence demonstrates that there is no standard application of the word [douleu,ein] in Paul’s writings.”290 The context must always remain determinative of the meaning of words. Brown is of the conviction that worship

112

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

is in view here, and he renders the phrase in 1 Thess 1:9 that the Thessalonians “broke with the worship of false gods.”291 We argue that the verb douleu,w when used in reference to God does carry the idea of service to God and because God is the object of this level of action or medium we have a religious context here. Service to God entails rendering honor and acknowledging him as the true master and this acknowledgment is expressed through various acts such as praising, acclaiming, and proclaiming God’s greatness, and such acts are constitutive of worship because they attribute worth to God the object of these actions. To do service to God also communicates the notion of ownership; a servant or slave belongs to his or her master and owes his or her master their allegiance, respect, and honor. We seem to have all three points that constitute worship, which fits the proposed criteria for worship in this study. We have the subjects who are the Thessalonian believers, the level of action or medium is their douleu,w, which has shifted from one object, idols, to another object, the living and true God. In the LXX, the verb douleu,ein is the most common term for the service of God.292 The relationship between the worshipper and God as noted above can be described as that of servant-master, but as we have seen the religious context is crucial for it is only within this context that worship can occur. Paul does view Christian believers as having become doulwqe,ntej de. tw/| qew/| / “enslaved to God” (Rom 6:22) or “slaves of God” (RSV; ESV). Christian believers as slaves or servants are in relationship to their heavenly master and express that relationship in action by serving and honoring him and acknowledging him. Malherbe notes that “to serve God requires total and exclusive allegiance . . . as a slave owes to his master.”293 Malherbe makes a number of important points here. Service to God is to be total and exclusive, and this allegiance is comparable to that of a slave and his master. Leon Morris likewise notes that douleu,ein “indicates the completeness of the Christian’s surrender to God.”294 In my definition of worship, I noted that the element of complete and total submission is a necessary component in order for worship to take place. Service to God as douleu,w as a servant or slave thus does seem to carry with it implications of worship, and it does so because the object of this action is God who is acknowledged, and therefore we can see worship implied in this text.295 John Reumann notes that the action of serving in the OT can be used in the sense or context of worship when YHWH is its object.296 This appears to be consistent with the proposed criteria of worship that when God is the object in a relationship, the medium or level of action exercised by the subject (the worshipper) constitutes worship because the context is a religious one. This however is not explicit in 1 Thess 1:9. It seems rather, that Paul’s main thrust here is to show a general transition of allegiance by the Thessalonian believers from idols to God. The contrast here is one of allegiance, formerly allegiance and service to idols, and now, service to the true and living God.

DESCRIPTION OF PAULINE WORSHIP IN LIGHT OF LANGUAGE

| 113

The verb douleu,w in this case can overlap with worship themes in the context of a person’s relationship to God only in a religious context, even though douleu,w is wide in its scope and application. The overlap of douleu,w with worship themes can be seen in the LXX where douleu,w is used in combination with other words that denote worship such as proskune,w.297 Paul does not combine douleu,w with a worship word here in 1 Thess 1:9 as the LXX does, but as I have argued it implies worship because of the religious context, and this does seem to fit my proposed criteria for worship. While the Pauline community in Thessalonica has experienced a religious transition in coming to serve the true and living God, there is another important qualifying clause connected to this Pauline theological statement, and it is one which includes the risen Jesus. The connection is seen in the two infinitives that appear in 1 Thess 1:9 and 1:10. Charles Wanamaker argues that verses 9–10 should be taken together, since the two infinitives contained in them are joined together by the same main verb.298 The two infinitives are douleu,ein / “to serve” (1:9) and avname,nein / “to wait for” (1:10). The Thessalonian believers are to do two things: (1) to serve God and (2) to wait for his Son, Jesus, whom he raised from the dead. This worshipping community was known by these two markers, service to God and awaiting the parousia299 of the risen Jesus. Morris notes that the parousia is given prominence here and is important,300 but Morris does not go on to stress the equal prominence or perhaps the more greater prominence that is given to the resurrection of Jesus. Wanamaker lapses into the same problem as Morris does when he asserts that had not the early followers of Jesus believed he was returning soon from heaven as the messianic Lord, “Christianity would almost certainly not have come into existence.”301 Wanamaker goes on to claim that “[b] elief in the parousia of Christ is what gave the resurrection its real significance.”302 This is, however, to put the cart before the horse so to speak. Paul does not claim that it is the parousia that is the basis and bedrock of Christian faith but rather the resurrection of Jesus (1 Cor 15). Wanamaker’s statement should be modified that if the early followers of Jesus did not believe he was raised from the dead by God, Christianity would not have come into existence. It was not the parousia that gave the resurrection its real significance; rather, the reverse is true: it was the resurrection of Jesus that gave the parousia its real significance. The parousia of Jesus is assumed because Jesus is alive, and he was brought back to life from the dead by God (1 Thess 1:10; cf. Gal 1:1). Thus the parousia is believed and awaited precisely because Jesus was raised from the dead and not vice versa. Thus, at the root of belief in the parousia lies the risen Jesus.303 Paul further heightens the identity of God as the served one by showing that Jesus is God’s Son, but also by employing a relative clause in stating that God is the one who raised Jesus from the dead: o]n h;geiren evk Îtw/nÐ nekrw/n VIhsou/n / “whom

114

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

he [God] raised from the dead” (1:10). Wanamaker suggests that one reason Paul adds this relative clause is for the purpose of identifying God’s Son as the one who is to come, or in other words, as being the same person as the one who was raised from the dead by God.304 The identity of Jesus as “Son of God” is invariably connected to his resurrection (Rom 1:3–4).305 Dunn also notes that Paul seldom speaks of Jesus as God’s Son, and when Paul does utilize this designation, “it is the resurrected and exalted Christ who is in view.”306 The resurrection of Jesus is an act of the living God (which he described as in 1 Thess 1:9), the creator of life.307 The God that Paul introduced to his communities is identified as the God who raised Jesus from the dead,308 and as the life giving God he is to be acknowledged. The identity of the God who raised Jesus from the dead is intricately tied to the identity of Jesus and vice versa in Paul. Francis Watson remarks that, If . . . God is, finally and ultimately, not just provisionally and in passing—the God who raised Jesus our Lord from the dead, the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, then God’s own identity is determined by the relation to Jesus just as Jesus’ identity is determined by the relation to God.309

I noted at the outset that an important area of study is that of the relation of the risen Jesus to Christian worship. Scholars recognize that it is the risen Jesus who is the major interpreting key to the idea and understanding of the Christian worship context. K. H. Rengstorf comments that the resurrection of Jesus is “the basis of the specifically Christian belief in God,”310 and A. M. Ramsey makes the observation that “Christian theism is Resurrection theism,”311 such that there is an equivalence between that which is Christian (including worship), and resurrection. For Paul it is God who gives life to the dead. God raised Jesus from the dead and will raise those who belong to Jesus. God is the one tou/ zw|opoiou/ntoj tou.j nekrou.j / “who gives life to the dead” (Rom 4:17).312 Malherbe also notes here that Jesus is identified and described in his relationship to God and as the object of God’s action in his resurrection.313 Here we note the place of the risen Jesus in Christian worship.314 Paul links the practice of the Thessalonian believers as “serving” God, and “awaiting” the parousia of Jesus. In doing so, Paul draws these two actions together in close proximity. Paul’s reference to God raising Jesus also recalls the heart and content of the gospel Paul preached and taught, which was based on the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus (1 Cor 15:1–4). Jesus is also presented as the agent who in the case of 1 Thess 1:10 will save the Christian community from the wrath presumably of God that is coming at the eschatological judgment. While Paul does not explicitly mention it here, he is implying nonetheless the soteriological significance of the death of Jesus. In Paul’s mind, it is the death of Jesus that saves or delivers believers from the wrath of God

DESCRIPTION OF PAULINE WORSHIP IN LIGHT OF LANGUAGE

| 115

(cf. Rom 5:8).315 While Paul explicitly mentions the resurrection and parousia of Jesus in 1:10, the death of Jesus is also implied. Here we observe again the content and heart of Paul’s gospel message, namely, that of the death and resurrection of Jesus (1 Cor 15:3–4) which Paul also saw as central to his worship of God. It was the proclamation of this gospel as noted above that Paul understood as his divine or religious service (latreu,w) to God (Rom 1:9). Augmented to this gospel message is the parousia of Jesus, which presupposes as we have noted that the risen Jesus is alive and thus will return. The expected parousia is meant to deliver Christian believers from the th/j ovrgh/j th/j evrcome,nhj / “the wrath that is coming.” The idea of the wrath of God is an important theological category in Paul316 because of its association with God’s righteous judgment against those who are evil and disobey him (Rom 2:5, 8).317 In conclusion, the verb douleu,w means to be a slave, to be subjected to someone, to serve. It also carries the idea of ownership or possession with the notion of total service to another. The semantic range of the verb douleu,w is very broad. It can be used of God, the risen Jesus, humans as well as impersonal things (sin, the law, desire). When this verb is used of God in particular, it takes on a different nuance because of the religious context that it is placed in. We observed that when douleu,w is used in reference to God the word is placed in a religious context and can in this case carry the meaning of “worship” where douleu,w becomes the level of action. In other contexts where it used of human masters (social context), governmental authorities (social-legal context), or fellow believers (ecclesiastical context), the meaning of douleu,w carries mainly the idea of service. Another important distinguishing factor is that when douleu,w is used of God, it carries the meaning of complete and total submission in service. When douleu,w is used of referents, other than God, the submission in service is not seen as complete and total. Submission to God as we have seen above is perceived by Paul as uncompromising and utterly total so much so that Paul employs the metaphor of sacrifice, which implies a surrender of one’s very life and which constitutes for him the reasonable service (latrei,a) of the worshipper (Rom 12:1). While others can receive a relative submission of service, God surpasses them in receiving total submission and service. The verb douleu,w communicates an important aspect in worship. While it does convey the idea of service in a wide semantic range of referents, it also carries the notion of ownership and possession. To exercise douleu,w towards God seems to imply the notion of God’s ownership and possession of his slaves or servants. In worship, the worshipper becomes the slave and servant of God, who has become his or her master. The worshipper owes one’s total submission to his or her master. If one serves God as one’s master who now owns and possesses him or her, then this calls for faithfulness to one’s master; he or she cannot serve another master. The contribution that douleu,w makes to the paradigm of worship is both the aspect

116

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

of service and possession / ownership by God, who is the ideal master of his slaves / servants, who are his worshippers. We see the meaning of douleu,w, which has been examined in the case of 1 Thess 1:9–10. The verb douleu,w is used with God as its referent. In this text, Paul states that the Thessalonians experienced a transition and a change of ownership from idols to God. They served idols at one time, but now they have turned to serve a living and true God. Here we see a clear transition from one master (idols), to another (God). The use of douleu,w here seems to suggest a change of service of masters. While Paul is not specifically dealing with worship in 1 Thess 1:9–10, douleu,w can carry implications of worship in that it suggests the idea of religious service, formerly to idols and now to God. In this case douleu,w can overlap with the meaning of worship. The reason for this is the religious context in which douleu,w appears as we see in 1 Thess 1:9–10. This demonstrates that when the context is religious and the object is divine and receives a level of action such as douleu,w, it meets the requirements for worship, and in this respect these elements fit the criteria for worship.

4.6. qrhskei, a The word qrhskei,a is a hapax legomenon in the Pauline corpus.318 The noun qrhskei,a appears in Col 2:18 where it refers to qrhskei,a| tw/n avgge,lwn / “the worship of angels,” a phrase which in the words of Douglas Moo is “the most difficult verse in Colossians to interpret.”319 What makes the usage of qrhskei,a in Col 2:18 interesting is that its referent is not God, but angels.

4.6.1. Colossians 2:18 mhdei.j u`ma/j katabrabeue,tw qe,lwn evn tapeinofrosu,nh| kai. qrhskei,a| tw/n avgge,lwn a] e`o,raken evmbateu,wn eivkh/| fusiou,menoj u`po. tou/ noo.j th/j sarko.j auvtou/ / “Do not let anyone rob you of your prize, insisting on humility and worship of angels, entering into things which he has seen, being vainly puffed up by the mind of his flesh.”

The word qrhskei,a is defined by BDAG as an “expression of devotion to transcendent beings, esp. as it expresses itself in cultic rites, worship.”320 Louw and Nida define qrhskei,a as “appropriate beliefs and devout practice of obligations relating to supernatural persons and powers – ‘religion, piety.’”321 In Hellenistic sources it is defined by Herodotus as religious worship322 as well as expressing such religious worship through external ceremonies.323 Herodian also uses it when he speaks of qrhskei,a tou/ qeou/ / “worship of God.”324 J. B. Lightfoot comments:

DESCRIPTION OF PAULINE WORSHIP IN LIGHT OF LANGUAGE

| 117

“The word [qrhskei,a] refers properly to the external rites of religion, and so gets to signify an over-scrupulous devotion to external forms.”325 Marvin  R. Vincent likewise notes that the meaning of qrhskei,a has to do with “the external aspects of worship.”326 Thayer defines this word as “religious worship, esp. external, that which consists in ceremonies.”327 We can deduce from these definitions of qrhskei,a that this word, while denoting religious devotion, also describes such devotion through means of external actions, forms, cultic rites, and ceremonies. The idea conveyed by this word has an external action or actions associated with it. Schmidt suggests that qrhskei,a can be used in one of two ways, either in a bad sense or in a good sense, because in Hellenistic literature it has been used in both a negative and positive way.328 This, however, can be said of any word for worship. As we saw in Paul’s treatment on the criteria for proper worship,329 Paul does not deny that various words used for the worship of God can and are used for others such as idols;330 the question is whether it is legitimate worship. Schmidt correctly notes this: “If this qrhskei,a is objectionable, it is because of the added [objective] genitive . . . everything depends on the object to which the qrhskei,a refers.”331 In other words, the identity of the direct object to whom qrhskei,a is rendered, is what determines whether this is a case of legitimate or illegitimate worship, at least in a context of Christian worship. The word qrhskei,a appears in Wis 4:18, 27 in reference to the worship of idols. It also appears in 4 Macc. 5:7, 13 in reference to “the religion of the Jews.” It is later used by Clement of Rome to refer to the Christian worship of God (1 Clem. 45:7; cf. 62:1). BDAG also points out that qrhskei,a is “not limited to deities,”332 however, the objects of qrhskei,a appear to be superhuman entities or “supernatural persons and powers,” according to Louw and Nida.333 Josephus used this term to refer to the Jewish worship of God.334 It is clear from the context of Colossians that Paul is opposing a position that he considers erroneous, the so-called “Colossian error.”335 The identity of the proponents of this error has been debated among scholars.336 The phrase qrhskei,a| tw/n avgge,lwn has been subjected to widely divergent interpretations337 and debate.338 The phrase may have been part of the vocabulary of the opponents at Colossae which Paul warns against.339 The object of qrhskei,a seems to be angels. This point has been debated in terms of whether there is an objective or subjective genitive in Col 2:18. K.  L. Schmidt argues that qrhskei,a| tw/n avgge,lwn should be taken as an objective genitive. Schmidt asserts: “With qrhskei,a the being to whom the practice refers is in the [objective genitive].”340 In this case, Col 2:18 sets a contrast between the worship of angels and the worship of God,341 so what we encounter here is a rivalry of worship. Clinton Arnold likewise argues with Schmidt that qrhskei,a| tw/n avgge,lwn should be taken as an objective genitive, and that the angels in Col 2:18 are intended to be the recipients of qrhskei,a.342 The understanding of qrhskei,a|

118

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

tw/n avgge,lwn as an objective genitive, where the angels are the objects of worship, is admittedly the traditional interpretation.343 Moreover, Dunn notes that there is no parallel to the phrase qrhskei,a| tw/n avgge,lwn outside of Col 2:18.344 The main problem with the position held by Schmidt and Arnold is the apparent lack of any such evidence that there was an angel cult in the first century CE. Dunn comments: “But the worship of angels is not something one would expect in any of the forms of Judaism known to us for this period.”345 The OT had strictly forbidden the worship of the host of heaven (Deut 4:19; 17:3; Jer 8:2; 19:13; Zeph 1:5). Angels are sometimes referred to as the ‘host of heaven’ and / or ‘stars’ (1 Kgs 22:19; Job 38:7; Isa 40:26; Dan 8:10; Rev 1:16, 20; 9:1; 12:4, 7; 1 En. 80:6; 86, 88; 2 Bar. 51:10). However, the prohibition itself presupposes that the host of heaven was worshipped, otherwise what need was there for the prohibition? There were also prohibitions in the first century against the worship of angels,346 and this again raises the question that if angel worship was not a concern, then why issue prohibitions against it? The lack of evidence of angel worship in the first century CE does not necessarily mean there was no such angel cult in existence, as an argument from silence cannot prove anything either way. It is possible that such a cult existed, but it is not certain in the absence of any available material textual evidence. Nevertheless, prohibitions against angel worship at least implicitly raises the question of its possible existence. The rejection of the proposal that qrhskei,a| tw/n avgge,lwn is an objective genitive (where angels are the recipients of qrhskei,a|) is based on the grounds that a number of scholars have dismissed the idea that there was any angel cult among the Jews during the Greco-Roman period,347 even denying that there was any direct evidence of an angel cult within paganism of the first century CE.348 An alternate approach to the phrase qrhskei,a| tw/n avgge,lwn is to argue that rather than it being an objective genitive, it is rather a subjective genitive. According to this view, it seems that what may be addressed here is not the worship of angels as the objects, but rather as the subjects; in other words, the text may be referring to worshipping with the angels,349 where the angels become the true exemplars of worship in the capacity of their role as heavenly ministers.350 Humphrey has argued that Christian worship involves the privileged invitation of worshippers to enter into God’s presence with the angelic host to collectively worship God.351 The “worship of angels” in this case becomes analogous to the modern phrase “worship of the church,” which is a designation of the worship that the church performs, not that someone worships the church itself.352 The interpretation in this case would be again between the objective and subjective use of tw/n avgge,lwn.353 While scholars have argued for both an objective genitive and subjective genitive, more scholars seem to be convinced of the latter primarily due to the work of Fred O. Francis,354 who argued that Col 2:18 did not speak of worship or a cult to angels

DESCRIPTION OF PAULINE WORSHIP IN LIGHT OF LANGUAGE

| 119

but rather with a mystical participation with the angels in the worship of God.355 Francis pointed to the Qumran texts in support of his contention.356 Geza Vermes in his studies of the Qumran texts agrees with Francis. Vermes makes the point that even in Qumran the worshippers believed that they were joining with the angels in prayer and blessing to God.357 Even in this case, God remains the focal point of worship and prayer by both humans and angels. In light of the research of Francis and Vermes, the claim made by Moo that few texts speak of humans joining in with angels in worship358 is certainly to be questioned. The Qumran texts do supply evidence that humans could join in with the angels in the worship of God359 as “the Qumran covenanters believed they kept close company with the angels.”360 The use of qrhskei,a as a subjective genitive is attested where people are doing the worshipping or they are the subjects who worship.361 Arnold objects to this by arguing that while there are examples of the use of the subjective genitive of qrhskei,a with people, there are no instances in ancient literature where it used in this way of divine beings such as angels.362 The difficulty in Arnold’s position is that this argument is one of silence. The absence of any textual evidence where qrhskei,a is used as a subjective genitive for heavenly beings such as angels does not constitute proof against it. Absence of evidence is not necessarily evidence of absence. The notion that heavenly beings or angels do worship God is evident in the biblical tradition,363 and as worshippers of God they are also his servants in relationship to him in the role of servant-master (Ps 104:4) as humans are. It is possible as Stuckenbruck suggests that the danger seen by Paul is that experiencing and / or participating in the worship of angels or with the angels could lead one to worship or give undue honor to an angelic being in an ecstatic vision.364 The opponents in this case would be perceived as those who had experienced the worship of angels in heavenly ecstatic visions.365 In deference to Schmidt, Arnold, and Francis, Stuckenbruck takes a mediating position in summarizing and maintaining that qrhskei,a| tw/n avgge,lwn refers to both a sharing or participation with angels in the worship of God and being tempted to venerate angelic beings during visionary experiences.366 R.  M.  M. Tuschling calls Stuckenbruck’s summarization “oversubtle.”367 Tuschling questions why Paul would object to the Colossian Christians sharing in the worship of angels in their worship of God.368 Tuschling responds by asserting Paul must be referring to an action which was objectionable and thus in Col 2:18 “only an objective genitive is possible.”369 Tuschling, however, does not make his case. He assumes that Paul would be amicable to the idea of the Christian community sharing the worship of God with the angels (as a subjective genitive would imply), but no evidence has been provided. Rather, it is better to take the position that Paul perceives the practices of the opponents to be altogether erroneous because they are not centered on Christ. In other words, whether we

120

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

are dealing with an objective or subjective genitive with qrhskei,a| tw/n avgge,lwn is completely irrelevant and misses the point of Paul in Colossians. Colossians present a polemical defense of the centrality of Christ in creation (Col 1:15–18), and salvation (Col 1:13–14). Warnings are issued against “philosophy” and “empty deceit” which is not centered on Christ and which is implicitly being promulgated by Paul’s opponents (Col 2:8). In Christ Paul argues, the fullness of deity dwells bodily (Col 2:9). Thus any “worship of angels” (either with the meaning of a subjective or objective genitive) engaged by the Colossian opponents would have been perceived as erroneous and a moot point from the start because of its dismissiveness of the centrality of Christ. A third alternative to the phrase qrhskei,a| tw/n avgge,lwn suggested by N. T. Wright is that Paul is using “heavy irony,” that the opponents have speculations about angels that the law was given through them (Gal 3:19), that they are in effect worshipping the angels instead of God. This over-interest or speculation about angels may have led the opponents to border on idolatry according to Paul.370 This, however, would be a case of an objective use of the genitive as Schmidt and Arnold have argued. This alternative, however, like the others is possible but inconclusive. In regards to Pauline angelology, Tolmie has noted that Paul does not view angels as overly important but rather sees them as serving an almost secondary role.371 While various views and interpretations of Col 2:18 persist, the important point which needs to be emphasized is that whatever is meant by qrhskei,a| tw/n avgge,lwn in Col 2:18, it is perceived by Paul as negative and erroneous, and something which is dismissive of the centrality of Christ’s role in the worshipping community.372 This negativity may also explain the hapax legomenon reference in Col 2:23373 to what Paul terms evqeloqrhski,a, which is “self-imposed religion” and “arbitrary worship . . . worship which one devises and prescribes for himself.”374 The ESV and NASB translate it as “self-made religion.” Schmidt notes about this term that “[i]t is a piety which does not keep to the reality and to what is implied in it, which does not keep to the true head, Christ. It is a piety which orders its own nature.”375 This indicates that some forms of worship are not legitimate or genuine but are inappropriately exercised, and it is possible that this may also have reference to qrhskei,a| tw/n avgge,lwn. Margaret MacDonald comments that the term evqeloqrhski,a has been taken to be “a polemical attack on the false teaching . . . in order to label the worship of the opponents purely human and worldly.”376 MacDonald sees an implicit connection here between Col 2:23 and Col 2:18 in terms of the worship practice of the opponents the writer is warning against.377 There is also a syntactical association in both Col 2:18 and 2:23 (and Col 3:12) where both verses employ the term tapeinofrosu,nh / “self abasement,” “humility.” Robert Wilson notes that evqeloqrhski,a in Col 2:23 echoes qrhskei,a in Col 2:18 with the difference being the use of the prefix evqelo.378 Is it possible that Paul in

DESCRIPTION OF PAULINE WORSHIP IN LIGHT OF LANGUAGE

| 121

Col 2:23 is alluding back to the worship of angels as a “self-made religion” or “arbitrary worship”? It seems from the context that Paul has the same group in mind which he is warning against, namely, those of Col 2:18 who engage in the worship of angels and as a result are engaging in their own self-made worship, which in the mind of Paul is not true legitimate worship of God. It is the opponents in Colossae who indulge in qrhskei,a| tw/n avgge,lwn, and they are to be rejected, including their beliefs and practices. The practice of qrhskei,a| tw/n avgge,lwn appears in a context of warning, not commendation to the Christian community. Another point of consideration is whether or not the angels mentioned in Col 2:18 are good angels or perhaps evil angels.379 Tolmie has shown that in the Pauline letters whenever Paul speaks of angels, it is sometimes ambiguous as to whether he has good angels or bad angels in mind, and sometimes it is uncertain.380 Is it possible that tw/n avgge,lwn in Col 2:18 are evil angels, and could they be the dominions, powers, and rulers alluded to in Col 1:16?381 Guthrie suggests that “[i]t seems best to regard this [qrhskei,a| tw/n avgge,lwn] as a reference to the usurping by angels of the true place of Christ as the only Mediator.”382 We point out again that ultimately the identity of these angels whether good or bad is irrelevant to Paul who denounces the practice altogether. The implications, however, of Paul’s denunciation of qrhskei,a| tw/n avgge,lwn is important, for it shows that only God is to be ultimately worshipped by both humans and angels. This idea is thoroughly in keeping with Paul’s view on worship. In effect, Paul heightens God’s identity, but also the identity of Jesus so that he is the preeminent ruler over all powers, which would include the angelic powers (Col 1:16–18), all of which are subordinate to the risen Jesus.383 If the phrase qrhskei,a| tw/n avgge,lwn is to be taken as an objective genitive, that the angels here are recipients of worship, then this demonstrates our point made above that anything in a religious context can be an object of worship. We observe here again the criteria that I have employed in this research. Since worship entails a relational religious act between a human and a superhuman entity or entities, in this case angels, then worship is being exercised here since it is a religious context. We have the subject(s) who are presumably humans who are performing the level of action (qrhskei,a), and the objects who receive this level of action, namely, the angels. The point that Paul raises is whether or not this is legitimate worship. The only legitimate worship is the worship of God. To worship anything outside of the creator is automatically to worship the creature, and this is the height of dishonor and treason, according to Paul as we saw in Rom 1:18–25. The collapsing of the distinctions between creator and creature is tantamount to idolatry for Paul because it robs God of the honor, glory, praise, and respect that is rightfully his. Moreover, this act creates an imbalance in the relationship between the creature and creator. The relationship between the creature and the creator is the most basic

122

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

relationship because of its ontological significance, which distinguishes God as creator from his creatures who are obligated to recognize him and to render to him proper honor, glory, praise, and respect and to acknowledge him. This informs us that Paul viewed God, to use the words of Karl Barth, as wholly or “fundamentally Other.”384 This ontological perspective on God’s identity forms the basis for Paul’s understanding of worship. This reinforces the observation above that the rendering of honor and respect to someone must be commensurate with their identity. Angels can be respected as we observed in our examination of 1 Cor 11:10 where the reference most likely alludes to the presence of the angels in the worshipping community.385 God, however, by virtue of the fact that he is creator is to receive the utmost respect and honor, and the attribution of these virtues constitute worship which is grounded in the personal relationship between the human subject (the worshipper), and the divine object, the God who is worshipped by the level of action rendered to him through various aspects and expressions. In summary, there has been debate among scholars as to the meaning of qrhskei,a| tw/n avgge,lwn in Col 2:18. Some take it to be an objective genitive (Schmidt, Arnold) where angels are the object of the level of action of qrhskei,a, a word which is used in a religious context in reference to God or supernatural powers. Others take it to be a subjective genitive (Francis, Vermes) where angels are the exemplars of the worship of God. These arguments are ultimately irrelevant. It is clear from the context that Paul views the practice of qrhskei,a| tw/n avgge,lwn as unacceptable and wholly erroneous (cf. Col 2:23) and to be rejected principally because it is opposed to the centrality of the risen Jesus in the worshipping community. To Paul, the risen Jesus is to have the primacy and preeminence over all things, which also includes the angels (Col 1:18). Here we also implicitly observe that qrhskei,a is to be given only to God, even though God is not the direct object of qrhskei,a in Col 2:18. The word qrhskei,a is a hapax legomenon in the Pauline corpus. It is a word that, according to lexical sources, while describing religious devotion also carries notions of external action(s) or aspects of worship such as the practice of cultic rites or external ceremonies. While this word appears in a text that deals with angels, which we have stated was opposed by Paul, the word qrhskei,a nevertheless contributes to the overall picture of worship by highlighting the aspect of external practice(s). Worship is not only an internal expression of one’s religious relationship with God; it also includes an external expression of that relationship. External actions are visible and confirmatory expressions of what the worshipper is seeking to demonstrate from the inside out. The word qrhskei,a expands our understanding of worship by pointing to one’s religious relationship with God in outward action. In this respect, worship cannot be reduced to merely an internal phenomenon, but

DESCRIPTION OF PAULINE WORSHIP IN LIGHT OF LANGUAGE

| 123

is much more comprehensive in its range to embrace external phenomena as well. In the next chapter, we will examine some of the external expressions of worship. In conclusion, in our examination and survey of the words and language Paul uses for worship we have noted the following. The series of words employed by Paul for worship demonstrates that he did not have one specific word for “worship” as we find in English usage, nor did he conceive of “worship” as reducible to only one particular aspect. The various words Paul employed suggest that he viewed worship as a mosaic made up of many individual parts and aspects. All these parts joined together form for Paul an overall comprehensive picture of worship. They also bring to the surface various individual aspects that highlight important contributions to the understanding of the Pauline framework of worship. The words latreu,w and latrei,a communicate the basic idea of service. These words are used in specifically religious contexts thus suggesting a religious service rendered to a superhuman entity or deity. Paul uses the verb latreu,w four times (Rom 1:9, 25; Phil 3:3; 2 Tim 1:3) and the noun latrei,a twice (Rom 9:4; 12:1). In these texts, Paul communicates the meaning of these words in terms of serving God either communally or individually, directly or indirectly. Paul can speak of serving God (latreu,w) individually in his spirit by means of proclaiming the gospel of his Son (Rom 1:9). Similar language is used in 2 Tim 1:3. We see an example of indirect service to God here where in the act of proclaiming the gospel to others Paul is in essence rendering worship or religious service to God because he is acting in the service of God and fulfilling what God desires. In Rom 1:25, Paul charges rebellious humanity with rendering latreu,w to idols instead of rendering it to God alone. Here Paul speaks of latreu,w in a collective and direct way. Humans are giving religious service directly to idols. Paul sees this as a heinous act against the creator. While latreu,w can be given to idols and other things, it is for Paul an illegitimate form of religious service or worship. Paul argues that general and direct religious service should be given by humans to God their creator. In Phil 3:3, Paul speaks of latreu,w in a communal context where he speaks of himself and the worshipping community rendering latreu,w by the Spirit of God. He further qualifies the faith community implicitly as the true circumcision, which evokes covenantal categories and contrasts it with another group whom Paul pejoratively designates “the dogs” (Phil 3:2). Paul thereby shows by this that there is criteria for proper worship and that only those who are the true circumcision can properly render latreu,w by the Spirit of God. The implicit object of this religious service is God. The important aspect of this word is that of serving and being in service to him. The noun latrei,a communicates the same idea of religious service. Paul uses it to refer to one of the privileges inter alia given to the nation of Israel (Rom 9:4). Some commentators see the appearance of latrei,a in Rom 9:4 as referring to the “temple worship” where religious service to God was exercised in a communal

124

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

context. In Rom 12:1, Paul uses latrei,a to describe the religious service that the faith community should render by offering up or presenting their bodies as living sacrifices which are to be holy and acceptable to God. Here we see the essence of latrei,a or religious service to God. It appears in a communal context with God as the direct object to whom this service is directed. Serving God also involves the aspect of total submission to him. The element of total submission is communicated by Paul in Rom 12:1 by employing the metaphor of sacrifice. Sacrifice denotes in this context a total surrendering of one’s life, rights, and privileges. The metaphor of sacrifice also evokes the OT concepts of holiness and proper presentation before God. The metaphor of sacrifice thus heightens the meaning of latrei,a in demonstrating that religious service is ultimate, total, and uncompromising, but also an on-going service as this sacrifice is a “living sacrifice.” The words latreu,w and latrei,a thus brings out the elements and aspects of service to God. The word seba,zomai is used by Paul only once in Rom 1:25. It appears together with latreu,w. The single usage of this word by Paul supports our contention that Paul did not conceive of worship as only one specific word in the Greek language. This is seen in the fact that Paul uses both seba,zomai and latreu,w in Rom 1:25 as descriptions of worship. The word seba,zomai carries the meaning of reverential awe or to honor religiously. The emphasis thus appears to be on the act of showing reverence and awe before a deity. Paul uses this word within a context where he is strongly denouncing idolatry. Rebellious humans are rendering seba,zomai to idols rather than to God who is the proper object of reverence and awe. The giving of reverence in the ancient world was linked to the standards of ethics and status386 and the giving of reverence was synonymous with giving honor, praise, blessing, and thanks.387 Another important element associated with giving reverence and awe to God is that of allegiance. Allegiance was affirmed by way of acknowledgment, usually in a public manner. Reverence as a synonym for honor was something that had to be publicly acknowledged.388 We see from this that seba,zomai communicates an important aspect of worship where God is reverenced and honored with a sense of awe. Closely associated with the sense of awe is the idea of fear, which is sometimes linked with reverence (cf. Prov 1:7), and which Paul sees as a characteristic of the Christian believer (2 Cor 7:1). The idea that seba,zomai contributes to the framework of worship is that of giving honor to God, thus highlighting the aspect of honor in worship. The word proskune,w like seba,zomai is used only once by Paul in 1 Cor 14:25, a text placed within a context of worship of the assembled Corinthian congregation. This sole appearance of proskune,w in Paul also lends support to the position that Paul did not think of worship as one specific word in the Greek language. The word proskune,w is a word that communicates an external visible gesturing action, which can involve prostration, falling upon one’s knees, or touching the

DESCRIPTION OF PAULINE WORSHIP IN LIGHT OF LANGUAGE

| 125

ground with the forehead. These gestures communicated by proskune,w denote an aspect of submission, surrender, and dependence. The subject who performs this act, according to 1 Cor 14:25, is an unbeliever (cf. 1 Cor 14:24). Paul’s use of this word indicates that he may have viewed worship as probably also involving a bodily posture indicating total submission and surrender to God. Another important aspect also seen here is that of the presence of God. These external visible gestures inherent in proskune,w communicating a sense of submission, surrender, and dependence, assume the presence of a superior to whom these actions are rendered. In the context of 1 Cor 14:25, it is clear that proskune,w takes place because God is believed to be present in the worshipping community. Thus Paul links proskune,w with the presence of God. The reason one prostrates, bends the knee, or touches the ground with the forehead in the worshipping community, is because God is there. This is affirmed and supported with the phrase uttered by the unbeliever who performs proskune,w: :Ontwj o` qeo.j evn u`mi/n evstin / “God is really among you.” In placing proskune,w in close proximity with this phrase, Paul is showing a connection between the act of proskune,w and a realization of the presence of God. While proskune,w can have a wide range of referents such as humans of a high status in a social-political context (monarch, governors, and rulers), it can vary in its meaning. When it is used in a religious context, the word proskune,w takes on the meaning of worship. The word proskune,w highlights an aspect of worship where submission, surrender to, and dependence on God are exercised by external and visual gestures. These gestures are exercised because of the belief in the presence of God in the worshipping community. Thus this word also implicitly carries the notion of the presence of God in a worship context. The word douleu,w means to be a slave, to be subjected to someone, or to serve, and carries the idea of ownership, or possession, with the notion of total service to another. It is used frequently by Paul and has a broad range of referents. It is used of human masters, governmental authorities, fellow believers, of impersonal things, and also of the risen Jesus, and God. The word douleu,w does not necessarily mean “worship.” When it is used in a religious context, however, it can take on a nuance for worship in that it denotes service to God, but more importantly, it denotes possession and ownership by God. Closely tied with possession and ownership are the concepts of total submission and allegiance which a slave or servant owes to his or her master. When the servant-master relationship is placed in a religious context, the ideas of total submission and allegiance to God overlap with worship themes. The idea of douleu,w can appear in a religious context where the referent of this level of action is a fellow believer. Even though the idea of service is intended in this case, it is a relative submission, and does not constitute worship because this is not a case of total submission, and the direct object is not a superhuman or heavenly entity. The idea of total submission to God has been observed already

126

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

in Rom 12:1 where Paul employs the metaphor of sacrifice, which implies a surrender of one’s very life, rights, and privileges. Paul uses a much stronger word for service (latreu,w), which has a more distinctly religious connotation to it than does douleu,w. The verb douleu,w communicates an important aspect in worship. While it does convey the idea of service in a religious context, it is weaker than latreu,w because the latter verb is used specifically in religious contexts while douleu,w has a wider range of referents. The important contribution of this word seems to lie in its notion of ownership or possession and allegiance. The worshipper becomes the slave and servant of God who has become his or her master. The worshipper owes one’s total submission to his or her master. One’s allegiance also includes fidelity to the worshipper’s one master who owns him or her. This idea of ownership/possession and allegiance is seen in 1 Thess 1:9–10 where a clear transition from one master (idols) to another (God) occurs. The use of douleu,w here suggests a change of service of masters. In this text, it was noted that Paul is not specifically dealing with worship, but douleu,w in this case can carry implications of worship in that it suggests the idea of religious service formerly to idols and now to God. The contribution that douleu,w makes to the paradigm of worship is that of service, but more importantly it highlights the themes of possession / ownership by God and allegiance to him who is the ideal master of his slaves / servants who are his worshippers. We also surveyed the word qrhskei,a. While this word is used in Col 2:18 in reference to angels, I argue that it addresses the practice of qrhskei,a in reference to angels in a negative fashion (cf. Col 2:23). For this reason I feel that the debate whether the reference to angels is in the objective or subjective genitive is irrelevant to Paul since his reference is denunciatory in nature. This denunciation seems to implicitly support the idea that qrhskei,a should be given to God, although this is not clearly stated since God is not the direct referent. The contribution which qrhskei,a makes to the paradigm of worship is by way of highlighting the aspect of external practice(s) in worship. Worship is not only an internal expression of one’s religious relationship with God; it also includes an external expression of that relationship which is visible and confirmatory of the devotion of the worshipper. The word qrhskei,a expands our understanding of worship by pointing to one’s religious relationship with God in outward action. All of these words which we have explored thus suggest that Paul did not conceive of worship as a solitary word with one meaning. Rather, it seems to be the case that Paul viewed worship as a comprehensive phenomenon or description of the basic religious relationship of the human subject to the divine worshipped object communicated by a series of various words. All of these words are not worship by themselves or in and of themselves, but individual constituent pieces that come together to form an orderly cohesive mosaic picture. The words we have

DESCRIPTION OF PAULINE WORSHIP IN LIGHT OF LANGUAGE

| 127

surveyed speak of religious service to God sometimes metaphorically described in terms of sacrifice to highlight total submission to him. They also communicate the idea of reverencing and honoring God. They convey the notion of expressing one’s total submission and surrender to God by bodily gestures such as prostrating and bowing the knees. This is aimed at acknowledging his presence. These words speak of ownership and possession by God where the worshipper as a slave or servant is in total submission of allegiance to God their master. Other words convey the idea of serving God by means of external ceremonies or rites. These external actions affirm the relationship and service of the worshipper to God. In the survey of words which have been examined above we observed that certain words are stronger than others in their definition of worship. Of all these words, we note that the very strong ones latreu,w, latrei,a, and seba,zomai appear in contexts where God is the sole recipient of worship, and these words denote a religious service to the divine object (Rom 1:9, 25; 9:4; 12:1; Phil 3:3; 2 Tim 1:3). The religious context as I have noted in the proposed criteria establishes a worship context. The words latreu,w, latrei,a, and seba,zomai are never used by Paul for the risen Jesus, but only for God.389 The word proskune,w is not as strong as latreu,w, latrei,a, and seba,zomai because it can have a wide semantic range of meanings depending on the identity of the recipient to whom proskune,w applies.390 It can apply to God as we have seen in 1 Cor 14:25, and in such a context it denotes “worship” because it meets my proposed criteria. It can also be used of humans as well.391 It is difficult to ascertain how Paul would have used proskune,w in other contexts because he only uses it once with God as its object, and thus proskune,w is a Pauline hapax legomenon. As such, Paul never uses proskune,w in reference to the risen Jesus in his letters. The verb qrhskei,a is a hapax legomenon in the Pauline corpus, and it appears as a very strong word that can have both God and idols as its referents in Greek literature. It is mentioned in reference to angels, which involves a worship practice that is denounced by Paul. The weakest of the words Paul employs is douleu,w / dou/loj, which can have numerous referents including God, but they do not necessarily mean worship, although they can implicitly denote worship when God is the intended object.

4.7. The Pauline Words Used for Worship and Their Referents Table 1 below is presented to illustrate the usage of the various words used by Paul that designate worship. It should be noted that the very strong verbs latreu,w and seba,zomai are used exclusively of God. In examining the Pauline words for worship

128

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

Table 1. Pauline words used for worship and their referents Words latreu,w / latrei,a seba,zomai proskune,w qrhskei,a douleu,w / dou/loj

God

Jesus

Angels

Humans

X X X X X

X

X

in Table 1, we can discern that Paul employed certain words that denoted worship for God alone (latreu,w, seba,zomai, proskune,w)392 while using others that could extend to serving both God and others such as douleu,w and dou/loj.

4.8. The Pauline Words for Worship Scaled by Levels of Strength Table 2 is presented to illustrate the various Pauline words on worship in terms of scaling from strongest to weakest. By “strongest” we mean that the words latreu,w, latrei,a, seba,zomai, and qrhskei,a are words that denote service to superhuman or divine objects or they are words that indicate specifically divine service where their referents or objects are usually divine beings. By “strong” we note that words such as proskune,w can have a human referent to it, which in this case denotes honor and respect. When proskune,w is used with God as its object, then the context becomes

Table 2. Pauline words used for worship scaled by levels of strength Levels Strongest Strong Weakest

Words latreu,w / latrei,a seba,zomai qrhskei,a proskune,w

douleu,w / dou/loj

Referents God creatures idols angels Goda God Jesus believers idols / gods

a  Outside the Pauline letters, proskune,w can refer to others apart from God. See Hurtado, How on Earth Did Jesus Become a God? 145–48.

DESCRIPTION OF PAULINE WORSHIP IN LIGHT OF LANGUAGE

| 129

religious and hence we have worship. The word proskune,w is thus conditioned by the context it appears in. By “weakest” we mean the words douleu,w / dou/loj have a very broad scope in their semantic meanings and carry the notion of service. It can refer to worship when God is the object to which the action of service is directed to or worship can be implicit. Usually these words denote duty and allegiance with a number of various referents.

4.9. Idolatry I have made a number of references to idols and idolatry above in the treatment of several Pauline passages (Rom 1:21, 23, 25; 1 Thess 1:9).393 At this juncture it would be appropriate to make some comments about idolatry, especially from Paul’s perspective.394 The word eivdwlolatri,a is defined as service to or worship to idols. This word appears to contain the term latrei,a.395 Moreover, idolatry is used biblically as a derogatory term which also means “image-worship,” and it was also “connected [with] polytheistic worship.”396 P. W. Comfort also notes that idolatry also entailed: [T]he pagan religious phenomena in Paul’s day in which images or material symbols of deities or other supernatural powers were objects of worship. But the term could also refer to the gods represented by the idol.397

Paul only mentions the word “idolatry” (eivdwlolatri,a) three times in 1 Cor 10:14, Gal 5:20 and Col 3:5.398 Whereas Paul refers to one of the privileges and blessings given to Israel to be that of latrei,a, which is the worship of God (Rom 9:4), idolatry came to be characteristic of pagan worship.399 It is clear from this distinction that idolatry refers to any form of worship given to anything perceived to be divine, or a divine entity, or divine entities other than the one true God whom for Paul is the God of Israel. Idolatry functions by focusing on the representation of a specific object of worship such as a god. An idol as Charles Masson notes “dans le grec profane” is “la forme, la figure, l’ombre” of a deity.400 Idolatry to Paul is the very antithesis of the worship of God. In short, idolatry can be defined as the worship of anything or anyone other than God. It is nevertheless viewed as worship because idolatry appears in a religious context. Idolatry becomes synonymous with false worship or empty worship401 as opposed to the true worship of God. As we noted above in our analysis of Rom 1:21, 23, 25, idolatry is the robbing and privatization of the honor that alone belongs to and is due to God alone.402 Richard Liong-Seng Phua has made the important observation that among the biblical features of idolatry is its misrepresentation and dishonoring of

130

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

God.403 It misrepresents God by depicting him as a finite entity (thus blurring the distinctions between creator and creature), and it dishonors him by rendering the honor that belongs to God to a created material object. Idolatry is further shown to be the worship of a creature or anything in creation instead of God the creator alone. Idolatry thus blurs the lines of demarcation between the creator and the creation, by attributing worth and value to the latter. John Witvliet defines idolatry as “aiming at the wrong target” and true worship as “aiming at the right [target].”404 This seems to be Paul’s point in Rom 1:25 as we examined above. The heinous nature of this sin is attested in the fact that Paul lists it in a category of serious offences against God which can bar one from entry into the kingdom of God (1 Cor 5:10–11; 6:9; 10:7, 14; Gal 5:20; cf. Col 3:5; Eph 5:5). Scholars have noted that in an earlier non extant letter which Paul wrote to the Corinthians, he had warned them not to associate with those who called themselves believers but who continued to practice idolatry as well as other offensive sins (1 Cor 5:9–11).405 Paul’s attitude towards idolatry was an uncompromising one and one of disdain for it.406 A worshipper of God could not at the same time be a worshipper of idols as these two were diametrically opposed to each other. Paul views idolatry as the primary root of all sins407 as seen in Rom 1:21–25.408 One’s actions in worship whether it is worship to God or to idols, have a proportionate effect on the subject who renders worship. G. K. Beale notes: “[T]o some extent Paul’s thought appears to include the concept that people become like the idols that they venerate, spiritually ‘empty’.”409 Beale further elaborates: “What one worships brings the worshipper into intimate contact with and under the powerful influence of the object of worship, whether that object is Christ or demons.”410 This idea is not original to Paul as it is already established in the OT.411 As worshippers of idols, idolaters become like the idols they worship, and hence they take on the characteristics of the idols such as the inability to see, hear, and speak. In short, they fail to properly function as the reflection of God’s image which they (humans) were intended to be. The human is to reflect the image of the creator God whom he or she is supposed to worship, but in idolatry the human reflects the image of something inferior to himself. In Eph 4:24 and Col 3:10, the believer in Christ is said to receive the new self which is created according to the likeness and image of God,412 language which is reminiscent of the original creation of the human pair made in the image and likeness of God (Gen 1:26–27; cf. Jas 3:9).413 Paul’s utter disdain and vehement denunciation of idols is probably due to his view that behind the worship of idols were the demons, so that sacrifices to idols were sacrifices to the demons (1 Cor 10:20–21).414 Here we see the criteria which has been proposed for the definition of worship. The subjects (who worship the idols), show reverence or religious service to the objects (idols / demons), by the medium of sacrifices (level of action). The act of sacrifice immediately places us in

DESCRIPTION OF PAULINE WORSHIP IN LIGHT OF LANGUAGE

| 131

a context of worship. Food or meat in this case becomes a religious item because it is sacrificed. Food in itself is not religious but is infused with religious meaning when it is used for sacrificial purposes. For Paul, idolatry is not only false worship; it is fellowship with demonic entities, and being united to them, which Paul vehemently forbids Christian believers to partake in. Worship, as noted at the outset of this study, involves a personal relational religious act. Here I note that Paul sees worship in terms of a relationship in a religious act between worshippers and idols / demons by means of sacrifice. In forbidding the sacrifices to idols, which in Paul’s mind is the equivalent of sacrificing to demons, Paul is in effect forbidding the worship of demons, and instead calls on the worshipping community to offer themselves in sacrifice only to God (Rom 12:1; cf. Rom 6:13), thereby indicating that their worship was to God alone. I also noted above that Paul utilized the noun qusi,a in Rom 12:1 in reference to believers offering their bodies as living sacrifices to God.415 Paul uses the verb qu,w in reference to idols / demons (1 Cor 10:20), and he understands it as a medium indicating worship. Paul is aware of the religious context of this word as it is the normal term for sacrifice in the LXX416 and when it does appear, it does so in a worship setting or context. Graham Twelftree makes the insightful observation that Paul says very little about demons, and that 1 Cor 10:20 is the only place in ‘the proto-Pauline letters’ where Paul actually mentions demons.417 Demons are also mentioned in 1 Tim 4:1. Inextricably tied to the idols was the meat or food offered to them.418 This was especially the case with Corinth, and its temples, which for Paul translated into worship. In this case, false worship of idols by engaging in the eating of food offered to them.419 Paul views the eating of food offered to idols as analogous to the worship of those idols because it was a means of securing one’s relationship to them. Jerome Murphy-O’Connor has commented that “scarcely any other meat would be for sale except for that supplied by the [pagan] temple.”420 While Paul allows the eating of such meat or food if it is sold in the marketplace or at home, or even in the home of an unbeliever (1 Cor 10:27), they were not participating in the practice of idolatry itself, nor were they in fellowship with or united to the demons. If upon buying such food or meat a Christian believer is informed that it was offered to idols, Paul calls for it to be rejected on the grounds that it may cause harm to the conscience of a weaker believer (1 Cor 10:28 cf. 8:10–11). Such an allowance to buy such food from the marketplace and / or eat it at home, or in the home of an unbeliever suggests as Fee has pointed out that what Paul is particularly forbidding is the eating of food or meat offered to idols in the temple of the idol itself.421 Here we obtain an insight into why Paul makes this important distinction. The possible reason why Paul strictly forbids the eating of such idol food in the idol temple itself is because the idol temple serves as the locus of the assembly of

132

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

the worshippers of the idols, i.e., the idolaters in Paul’s mind. Within that context, worship and various expressions of devotion would have been practiced towards (religious relational act) the various gods (whom Paul perceives as “demons”) represented by the idols in the temple.422 What makes this practice illicit in Paul’s mind is the religious context which is placed within a worship setting where the idols are worshipped. In the home of a believer or an unbeliever where no such religious worship context appears to exist as it does in the idol temple, the danger appears to be absent, and Paul’s concerns thus appear to be assuaged in these cases. We cannot assert for certain, however, that no religious worship took place in the home of an unbeliever. It is very possible that libations or the giving of thanks could have been offered to various gods at meals, and this would constitute religious worship. At the heart of all this seems to be Paul’s concern that idolatry presents a very serious imbalance in relationship between the believer and God. Idolatry strikes at the very heart of one’s uncompromising commitment to God alone because it violates it by introducing the worship of something other than God, even much worse, the worship of demons. The point here again is not that idols / demons cannot be worshipped; the question is one of legitimacy. Paul believes God is the only legitimate object of worship. Paul writes in agreement with what seemed to be an accepted saying among the Corinthian believers that an idol has no real existence in the world, and that there is no other God but one (1 Cor 8:4).423 However, while Paul is willing to agree that an idol has no real existence in the world, he nonetheless sees them as props for demons, a cover for the actual constitutive worship of demons whom Paul sees as the active influence behind them.424 The parallel between idols and demons that Paul acknowledges is rooted both in the OT (Deut 32:17; Ps 96:5; LXX Ps 95:5; Ps 106:37; LXX Ps 105:37), and in Second Temple Judaism (Bar 4:7; Jub. 1:11;11:4; 1 En. 19:1). Twelftree notes that Paul takes up the belief “reflected in the Septuagint that the gods of the Gentiles are demons and that non-Jewish sacrifices are authorized by demons.”425 We note again the act of sacrifices as the medium or level action which brings out the religious context of worship here. When Paul treats the subject of idolatry it tends to appear within the context of worship, particularly a context of a rivalry of worship between God and that of idols. We noted this in Rom 1:25 where Paul sees idolatry as a degenerative result of the human’s rejection of God as the proper referent of worship by virtue of his identity as creator. Paul’s contrasting emphasis between “the creator” and “the creature” in Rom 1:25 is set to establish the lines of demarcation between God and creation. Implicitly, Paul shows here that idolatry ultimately is the worship of the creature or of created things as against the proper worship of the creator.

DESCRIPTION OF PAULINE WORSHIP IN LIGHT OF LANGUAGE

| 133

One of Paul’s extensive treatments on idolatry is set out in 1 Cor 8 and 10. The fact that Paul addresses the subject of idolatry in 1 Cor 8 and 10 indicates that he is concerned primarily with the worship practices of the Corinthians believers. More importantly, Paul is particularly concerned as to whom that worship is being directed. As we noted Paul regards idols as really nothing and having no real existence in the world. Ultimately, for Paul, there is only one true God (1 Cor 8:4; 10:19).

4.9.1. 1 Corinthians 10:14, 19–22 In 1 Cor 10:14, 19–22 Paul writes, 14Dio, p er

av g aphtoi, mou feu, g ete av p o. th/ j eiv d wlolatri, a j .  .  . 19 ti, ou= n fhmi o[ t i eivdwlo,quto,n ti, evstin h' o[ti ei;dwlo,n ti, evstin 20 avll o[ti a] qu,ousin Îta, e;qnh(Ð426 daimoni,oij kai. ouv qew/| qu,ousin ouv qe,lw de. u`ma/j koinwnou.j tw/n daimoni,wn gi,nesqai 21  ouv du,nasqe poth,rion kuri,ou pi,nein kai. poth,rion daimoni,wn ouv du,nasqe trape,zhj kuri,ou mete,cein kai. trape,zhj daimoni,wn 22 h' parazhlou/men to.n ku,rion mh. ivscuro,teroi auvtou/ evsmen. 14Therefore,

my beloved, flee from idolatry . . . 19 Do I say then that food sacrificed to idols is anything, or that an idol is anything? 20 But that which [the Gentiles/nations] sacrifice, they sacrifice to demons and not to God; and I do not wish that you have fellowship with the demons. 21 You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons; you cannot partake of the table of the Lord and the table of demons. 22 Or do we provoke the Lord to jealousy? Are we stronger than he?

We briefly noted this passage above but wish to make some further comments on it.427 Paul issues here an imperative to the Corinthian Christians that they are to flee from idolatry or the worship of idols.428 Paul uses the history of Israel in the wilderness, falling into the trap and sin of idolatry, and experiencing the wrath and judgment of God, to warn the Corinthians that they too would not escape the judgment of God if they continued in idolatry (1  Cor 10:1–12). The same charges that were leveled against Israel in the OT and the consequences of their rebellion are used as a paradigm by Paul for the Corinthian believers. The history of Israel in the case of idolatry is a warning lesson for the present community of faith (1 Cor 10:11). I make reference to this only in passing.429 Paul reiterates his point that food sacrificed to idols and idols themselves are really not anything in themselves (1 Cor 10:19). Paul’s use of eivdwlo,qutoj indicates that he has a worship context here. The word eivdwlo,qutoj according to Louw and Nida means “the meat of animals which have been sacrificed to idols—‘sacrificial meat, meat of animals sacrificed to an idol.’”430 They point out, moreover, that the word “is a semantically complex word meaning literally ‘that which has been sacrificed to idols.’”431

134

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

We have seen that the practice of sacrifice entails a religious worship context, so that what has been sacrificed to idols (usually meat), involves a medium or level of action, namely, the act of sacrificing the said meat to the idol. Conzelmann understands the very practice (or what we refer to as the level of action) of sacrifice itself to evoke a context of worship.432 Aune notes that there were many types of sacred meals in the Greco-Roman world and that in particular the symposium or “drinking party” was “a social and religious custom . . . which was framed with prayers, libations, and food offerings and thus had the characteristic of a sacral meal.”433 These practical expressions would at times overlap or interchange with each other so that a libation, for instance, would be accompanied with prayer and a hymn / paean, or at times the act of libation would become itself both the prayer, and the hymn.434 These level of actions such as prayers, libations, and food offerings and their divine objects of reference such as the Olympian deities such as Zeus Savior435 is what gave this event a religious connotation and made the meal “sacral,” and thus in this context according to my proposed criteria worship takes place. This worship context is further corroborated by Greek writers who note that these food offerings were given to various deities and that the sacred meal concluded with the pouring of libations and singing of hymns to the deities.436 Paul’s primary concern is that the hidden objects behind the idols to which the sacrifices are offered are in fact demons (1 Cor 10:20), and hence Paul does not see this act of sacrificing as a neutral activity or meaningless437 but a spiritually dangerous exercise. The very act of sacrifice which constitutes a context of worship (level of action) would make these demons behind the idols into gods, thus making them objects of worship.438 The idol temples thus become for Paul the habitation of demons and the idols the locus of demons.439 The issue of meat offered to idols and its connection with worship appears to have been an issue even after Paul as it is attested in Did. 6:3, peri. de. th/j brw,sewj o] du,nasai ba,stason avpo. de. tou/ eivdwloqu,tou li,an pro,sece latrei,a ga,r evsti qew/n nekrw/n / “And concerning food, bear what thou art able; but against that which is sacrificed to idols be exceedingly on thy guard; for it is the service of dead gods.”440 The Didache uses the same term eivdwlo,qutoj as Paul does in 1 Cor 10:19. The difference here is that the Didache uses the noun latrei,a to communicate the level of action or medium that describes the relationship of the subject or worshipper to the idols, which it calls qew/n nekrw/n / “dead gods,” who in this case are the objects of worship. The level of action (latrei,a / “service”) is realized by sacrificing food to the idols, and sacrifice places this relational act within a religious context which translates into worship. Again Paul makes the sharp contrast in 1 Cor 10:20 between idols / demons and God; it is not to God that these sacrifices are made, and since God is not the intended object of worship, this particular act is constitutive of idolatry. This reinforces my earlier point that the worship of anything other than God constitutes

DESCRIPTION OF PAULINE WORSHIP IN LIGHT OF LANGUAGE

| 135

idolatry in Paul’s mind. Paul does not deny that idols can be worshipped; Paul is intent on showing rather that only God is the legitimate object of worship. Paul is arguing a point of view based on his monotheism (1 Cor 8:4, 6; Rom 3:30; Gal 3:20; 1 Tim 2:5) where he sees a tension between the one God and the other gods represented by idols to whom sacrifices were made. Paul recognized that the act of sacrifice was indicative of worship because it functions as I have argued as the medium or the level of action whereby the subject or the worshipper relates to the object of worship. Paul ties the notion of Christian believers offering up their bodies as a “living sacrifice” to their “spiritual worship” of God (Rom 12:1–2). Sacrifice denotes a surrendering act to the deity or deities. Robertson and Plummer note that in the practice of sacrifice there is a “communion” or fellowship, or a partnership between the deity and the worshippers.441 Paul makes another interesting statement to the effect that he does not want the Corinthian Christians to become partners with demons in the act of sacrificing to them through the idols. Paul is forbidding and prohibiting any relationship with the demonic,442 which he sees as inherently related to idolatry. This indicates that what one worships, one is in relationship to, as I noted in the definition of worship at the beginning of this study, that worship is a relational religious act. Fitzmyer captures this point when he argues that becoming partners with demons involves “those who share in a worship service of such gods (in reality, demons).”443 Beale also notes that Paul may be insinuating that what people commit themselves to, in this case idols / demons, they become conformed to,444 “they take on the nature of the things to which they commit themselves.”445 Paul does not want the Corinthian believers, who are worshippers of God and therefore in relationship to God, to be in relationship or partnership with the demons. In Paul’s contrasting reference, that what is sacrificed to idols is sacrificed to demons and not God, there appears to be here a deliberate quotation (in 1 Cor 10:20) by Paul of the OT text of LXX Deut 32:17a,446 a passage where God “remonstrates with disobedient Israel.”447 The linguistic parallels are presented here: LXX Deut 32:17a448

1 Cor 10:20

e;qusan daimoni,oij kai. ouv qew/|

avll o[ti a] qu,ousin daimoni,oij kai. ouv qew/| qu,ousin

It should be noted that Paul not only indicts some of the Corinthians with idolatry, and thus with sacrificing to demons, but Paul does the same with Israel, who through their idolatry were also guilty of sacrificing to demons.449 One cannot be a worshipper of God and a worshipper of idols / demons at the same time, as

136

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

their allegiance becomes divided. Paul brings this incompatibility to the forefront by raising a number of contrasting statements, namely, that a Christian believer cannot drink both the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons; he or she cannot partake of both the table of the Lord and the table of demons (1 Cor 10:21). The respective acts are incompatible and diametrically opposed to one another. I will not address the issue of the Eucharist at this time as we shall examine it further below, but will only note that Paul uses the Eucharist to show that the fellowship and partnership of Christian believers should be to the Lord and not to the demons. One can drink and eat from one certain cup and table (the Lord’s or the demons’), but not from both since participation in the Eucharist is irreconcilable with the idols sacrifices being offered to demons in which people partner with demons.450 Thus Paul shows an imbalance here in worship. Paul also ties the act of worship at this point with the idea of eating and drinking in a cultic context. Dennis E. Smith in his important work on banquets and eating as a social event in the Greco-Roman world,451 has shown that Paul utilizes many features of Greco-Roman banquets, especially that of “banquet entertainment,” to suggest that “worship took place at the community table.”452 The reason Smith arrives at this conclusion is because he argues early Christians “regularly met at table, and since their meetings included some form of worship, we may also speculate that they worshipped at table, at least in part of the time if not all of the time.”453 Smith is of the conviction that since Christians usually gathered at table, particularly in the dining room of the house (the largest room), they would also conduct their worship activities there as well.454 Therefore, when Paul describes the activities of worship that occur in 1 Cor 12 and 14, Smith contends that these activities of worship occur while the Christians are still at the table.455 Smith also feels that the table where Christians ate and drank is “the foundation for early Christian worship.”456 While this may be true to some extent, it is more likely that table fellowship was a consequent of early Christian worship which was centered primarily on the experience of the risen Jesus and their relationship to him. Smith does not define worship or provide criteria for it, yet his main thesis is not on worship but on the genre of the Greco-Roman banquet in the early Christian world. When Paul does employ the various words for worship which we have examined and the various expressions for worship, he does not always explicitly tie them to Christians gathered at table (1 Cor 14:25 with its use of proskune,w may be an exception if Smith’s thesis is correct that the Corinthian Christians worshipped at the table), although it is possible they were gathered at the table to hear Paul’s letters. Smith acknowledges that it is primarily the Pauline correspondence with the Corinthians in 1 Corinthians that appears to sustain his thesis.457 We cannot be altogether certain that this was always the case, but Smith’s thesis appears to be strongly convincing. If Smith’s position is sound, then we have a clear link between

DESCRIPTION OF PAULINE WORSHIP IN LIGHT OF LANGUAGE

| 137

eating and drinking at the table and the act of worship. The act of drinking, particularly within a religious context, was as we have seen also connected with the idea of libations to various gods. It is for this reason as E. P. Sanders argues that: “Greeks (and others) poured out a small libation [to the gods] whenever they drank wine. . . . Gentile wine doubtless conveyed associations of idolatry”.458 Thus we observe a link between drinking in a religious context and worship. It is the religious context again as I have argued that grounds various acts within the category of worship. To share food is also to establish a context of fellowship.459 As we saw above, this sharing of food created a bond both in a social context, and in a religious context, and sometimes both of these contexts merged into a social-religious one. The sharing of food also functioned as an identity marker. One’s identity was marked with whom one ate or shared a meal with. Taussig remarks: Associating oneself libationally with an important personage at the meal itself communicated important aspects of identity—that is, if one sees the pivotal libations as subliminal explorations of identity (to whom do you belong?), raising a cup to a person of honor at the meal one was attending encouraged a sense that one and the honored person belonged together, that the respective identities reinforced each other.460

The acts of drinking and eating as Paul relates it to the Eucharist denote the idea of “partaking,” hence the drinking and eating of the cup and table of demons entails a partaking with the demons461 as conversely drinking and eating from the cup and table of the Lord entails a partaking with the Lord.462 To drink from the cup of demons and eat from their table in the pagan temples is by the very act to enter into fellowship with them, and consequently, to render worship to them.463 Hence Paul calls for the Corinthian believers to speedily abandon this practice. Fellowship cannot be shared with both the Lord and the demons, and to drink and eat from one table is to exclude the other. In 1  Cor 10:22 Paul poses two questions: h' parazhlou/men to.n ku,rion mh. ivscuro,teroi auvtou/ evsmen; / “Or are we provoking the Lord to jealousy? Are we stronger than he?” These questions are posed by Paul by way of warning to the Corinthian believers, in actuality a “strong word of warning.”464 By using the interrogative particle mh, Paul is anticipating and implying a negative response from the Corinthians.465 The tension of allegiance that Paul presents here is that of the Lord versus the demons. What is particularly significant here is that Paul makes reference to provoking to.n ku,rion / “the Lord” to jealousy. The ku,rioj here must be a reference to the risen Jesus as Paul has just spoken about the cup of the ku,rioj and the table of the ku,rioj, which refer to the Eucharist where the sacrificial death of Jesus is remembered. The immediate context presents Jesus as the ku,rioj,466 and this title seems to be the favored Pauline title for the risen Jesus467 (Rom 1:3–4; 10:9; 1 Cor 8:6; 12:3; 2 Cor 4:5; Phil 2:11). Paul is stating that the Lord Jesus can

138

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

be provoked to jealousy by the idolatrous acts of Christian believers in their partaking of the idol meals within the idol temples. Paul also raises the question “are we stronger than he [the Lord]?” In using the inclusive “we,” Paul appears to be appealing to the Corinthians468 while at the same time showing the Lord’s “anger cannot be braved with impunity.”469 As Paul drew an analogy between the idolatry of ancient Israel and the Corinthian church, Paul also borrows the language of the OT where Israel provoked God through their idolatry and applies the same language and text to the risen Jesus. What we encounter here again is another example of what Capes calls an application or allusion of a YHWH text to the risen Jesus.470 As YHWH was provoked to jealousy by the idolatrous worship of Israel (Deut 32:21),471 so Christ is provoked to jealousy in the Christian assembly when there is idolatrous worship (1 Cor 10:22).472 That Paul intends to identify the YHWH of Deut 32:21 with Christ is clear from the linguistic parallels with idolatry both in the context of Israel in the OT and the Corinthian community. As in 1 Cor 10:20 where Paul quotes from LXX Deut 32:17a, so in 1 Cor 10:22 Paul also quotes from another LXX passage in Deut 32:16, 21 where he continues on the theme of idolatry. This indicates a deliberate intention on Paul’s part again to draw an analogy between the idolatry of ancient Israel and the present Corinthian Christian community.473 The passages are set out as follows: LXX Deut 32:16, 21 parw,xuna,n me evpV avllotri,oij evn bdelu,gmasin auvtw/n evxepi,krana,n me . . . auvtoi. parezh,lwsa,n me evpV ouv qew/| parw,rgisa,n me evn toi/j eivdw,loij auvtw/n474

1 Cor 10:22a h' parazhlou/men to.n ku,rion

What is of particular interest is the similarity of language in these two passages. Both of them speak of the subject (God / Christ) being provoked to jealousy with the use of the verb parazhlo,w.475 Louw and Nida define this verb as: “to cause someone to feel strong jealousy or resentment against someone.”476 Fee notes that the idea of jealousy is related to God’s holiness and power in which God “is to be understood as so absolutely without equal that he will brook no rivals to his devotion.”477 In the case of 1 Cor 10:22a however, Paul specifically refers to the Lord Jesus as being provoked to jealousy, not God.478 The idea of jealousy implies an intimate relationship and here Paul shows that the risen Lord Jesus is in relationship with the Corinthian Christians. As God was provoked to jealousy by Israel’s idolatry, so the risen Christ is also provoked by the idolatry of the Corinthians.479 This also implies that the risen Christ is cognizant of what his people are doing,

DESCRIPTION OF PAULINE WORSHIP IN LIGHT OF LANGUAGE

| 139

and here Paul appears to be placing the risen Christ squarely within the divine identity. This is seen primarily in the allusion to Deut 32:16, 21, a YHWH text where Paul’s language seems to be taken from. Paul calls for allegiance in this case to the risen Christ as opposed to the idols. They cannot serve Christ and serve idols at the same time, nor can they drink and eat of the Eucharist, while at the same drinking and eating from the table of demons. One would have expected Paul to show God as the provoked party in 1 Cor 10:22, but it is rather the risen Jesus. In this respect, Paul seems to show that in the Christian community it is both God and the risen Jesus which become the object of Christian allegiance and worship. Alan Segal recognizes that what Paul is advocating in his letters when he deals with worship is the worship of both God and the risen Jesus, a view which was vociferously condemned in rabbinic Judaism as the heresy of the “two powers in heaven.” Segal comments, “By this term the rabbis largely (but not exclusively) referred to Christians who as Paul says, do exactly what the rabbis warn against: they worship the second power.”480 This charge by Segal, however, appears anachronistic at best since while Paul believed the risen Jesus could be worshipped, it is highly doubtful Paul would have conceived of this as worshipping a “second power,” since Paul was a strict monotheist (1 Cor 8:4–6). Rather, it seems Paul saw both God and the risen Jesus as conjointly receiving worship and as conjointly sharing in the divine identity (1 Cor 8:6).481 Paul does not see devotion to the risen Jesus in the worshipping community as constituting idolatry; on the contrary, he views devotion to idols or idolatry as offending and provoking the Lord Jesus, who is the rightful referent of the Christian’s allegiance and undivided devotion. Paul brings both God and the risen Jesus into his discussion of idolatry. While Paul affirms that idol sacrifices are sacrifices to demons and not God (1 Cor 10:20), he implies here that the allegiance and worship of the Corinthians should be to God. However, as we have seen in 1 Cor 10:22, the one whom the Corinthians are provoking to jealousy is the Lord, who is the risen Jesus. In this respect, Paul conjoins together the two, God and the risen Jesus, into the focus of Christian worship. In summary, idolatry for Paul is the very antithesis of the worship of God; it is an illicit and false form of worship. It is the worship of anything outside of God and is for Paul the origin of spiritual degeneration in the human being. Idolatry is in short the worship of anything but God, that is, the worship of creation or the creature over the creator (Rom 1:25). Paul views this offense as a grave one which can bar one’s entrance into the kingdom of God (1 Cor 5:10–11; 6:9; 10:7, 14; Gal 5:20; cf. Col 3:5; Eph 5:5). Idolatry appears in Paul in the context of worship, but it is a context of rival worship. The grave danger of idolatry for Paul is that it is in fact a veiled form of demon worship, and Paul warns his faith communities against engaging in any partnership with the demonic. At base level, a worshipper of God

140

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

is to be faithful to him alone. Paul, however, introduces as we have seen the risen Jesus into the spectrum of Christian worship, so that to commit idolatry is to sin against the risen Jesus and to provoke him to jealousy (1 Cor 10:22), just as God was sinned against by Israel in provoking him to jealousy through their idolatry.

9.9.2. Temple of God vs. Idols: 2 Corinthians 6:16–18 In 2 Cor 6:16–18, Paul applies the metaphor of the temple to the collective worshipping community while at the same time arguing against idolatry. In the wider context of this passage (2 Cor 6:14–18),482 Paul is addressing the issue of unbalanced relationships between Christian believers and unbelievers.483 That no rival temples are to be tolerated and that Paul envisages the Christian worshipping community as the one temple of God is stressed by Paul in 2 Cor 6:16–18, 16

ti,j de. sugkata,qesij naw/| qeou/ meta. eivdw,lwn h`mei/j ga.r nao.j qeou/ evsmen zw/ntoj kaqw.j ei=pen o` qeo.j o[ti VEnoikh,sw evn auvtoi/j kai. evmperipath,sw kai. e;somai auvtw/n qeo,j kai. auvtoi. e;sontai, mou lao,j 17 dio. evxe,lqate evk me,sou auvtw/n kai. avfori,sqhte le,gei ku,rioj kai. avkaqa,rtou mh. a[ptesqe\ kavgw. eivsde,xomai u`ma/j 18 kai. e;somai u`mi/n eivj pate,ra kai. u`mei/j e;sesqe, moi eivj ui`ou.j kai. qugate,raj le,gei ku,rioj pantokra,twr)484

16 What

agreement has the temple of God with idols? For we are the temple of the living God, as God said, ‘I will dwell in them and walk among them and I will be their God and they shall be my people. 17 Therefore come out from the midst of them and be separate’ says the Lord, ‘and touch no unclean thing and I will receive you 18 and I will be to you a Father and you shall be to me sons and daughters,’ says the Lord Almighty.

Paul uses the metaphor of the temple for the faith community as a whole in 1 Cor 3:16–17 and Eph 2:21–22, and individually in 1 Cor 6:19–20. In 2  Cor 6:16, Paul now includes himself with the worshipping community by using the first person plural verb in asserting ga.r nao.j qeou/ evsmen zw/ntoj / “For we are the temple of the living God” (italics mine). In 2 Cor 6:16, Paul resorts to identifying the temple of God as a collective whole realized in the assembled Christian worshipping community as he did in 1 Cor 3:16–17. Here the emphasis by way of the temple metaphor is on the dwelling presence of God. The idea of the presence of God among his people is an important one in the context of worship because it affirms that God is with them when they gather to worship. It also assumes that God is present and able to hear the prayers and requests, songs, and other communicative actions that occur during the worship gathering. Paul quotes an OT text or possibly a number of conflated texts where God says he will live and walk among his people (Exod 29:45; Lev 26:12; Jer 31:1; Ezek 37:27).

DESCRIPTION OF PAULINE WORSHIP IN LIGHT OF LANGUAGE

| 141

This description of God living in and walking among his people serves as a significant point by Paul in showing that God is intimately present in and with his people. We have here an emphasis on the immanence of God in the context of worship. That he walks among his people in their worship gatherings serves as an almost tangible point of reference to communicate that God is truly and really present with them. The idea of God walking with people, and of people walking with God in the OT was an expression of one’s relationship and fellowship with God (Gen 5:22–24; 6:9; 48:15; Mal 2:6; cf. Gen 3:8 where God walking in the garden is associated with his “presence”). In this respect, we can see why Paul employs the metaphor of the temple, since the temple was supposed to be the locus of God’s presence with his people in the OT while at the same time, being the place where the people of Israel worshipped God (cf. Exod 25:8). There is a significant difference, however, between the temple in the OT and what Paul is trying to convey here with his temple metaphor. Paul is now saying that the temple is not so much a place where Christian believers go to worship to meet with God and experience his presence: they are now the temple where the presence of God resides. Paul uses the temple metaphor insofar as it communicates the presence of God, but he identifies the temple not as a building but as the worshipping community itself. This view is not unique to Paul as the Qumran community also viewed the faith community as the temple of God (1QS 8.5–9; 9.6; CD 3.19A; 2.10; 13B; 4Q511 frg. 35.2–3).485 The presence of God among his people is the catalyst or trigger that prompts and evokes worship so that there is a co-relation between the presence of God and worship. We saw this above in the treatment of 1 Cor 14:24–25 where Paul speaks about an unbeliever coming into the congregation during worship and being convicted by the prophesying he hears and he reacts by performing proskune,w and declaring that God is truly among them.486 Thus worship takes place because God is believed to be present, and he is honored by various levels of action that are rendered to him to acknowledge his presence in the faith community. As God’s temple the faith community is also his possession. The phrase nao.j qeou / “temple of God” (2 Cor 6:16) appears to be a genitive of possession.487 It was noted that the idea of possession in worship was also communicated by Paul’s use of douleu,w where to be God’s slave or servant entailed that one was God’s possession, and therefore their allegiance was to him alone.488 Here Paul communicates the sense of possession and ownership by employing the metaphor of the temple. The point which Paul seeks to argue in this particular passage is also a polemical one. He employs the imagery of the temple for the collective worshipping community in order to countenance idols which were part of the social fabric of Corinthian society and culture.489 If the temple of God in this case is the believing Christian community, then they should separate themselves from idolatry even though they dwell in the midst of idolatry.490 Here Paul sets and contrasts the

142

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

temple of God (Christian faith community) with idols, and he vigorously calls for separation and non-compromise. Paul cites in verses 16–18 of 2 Cor 6, not one particular Scripture passage, but a series of Scriptural passages491 from the OT to form as it were a collage and conflates them into one entire quote.492 Each of the OT passages according to their immediate contexts have the people of Israel in mind, but Paul applies these passages nonetheless to his Gentile community in Corinth whom he sees now as the people of God, his temple wherein he dwells, lives, and moves. Familial language is also important here as mention is made of Christian believers as “sons and daughters” of God. I have treated the subject of familial language in relation to the worshipping community above.493 Whenever Paul uses temple imagery for believers there is also a close association with that of believers being the family of God as evidenced here in 2 Cor 6:18.494 In 2 Cor 6:16–18 after Paul has called the Corinthians to be separate from idols by asserting that they are God’s temple (v. 16), he goes on to show that while they are the temple of the living God, they are also sons and daughters of God. In rhetorically asking whether there is agreement between the temple of God and idols, Paul shows his intolerance for rival allegiances in the Christian worshipping community. For Paul the temple of God = believers who constitute the worshippers of God, while for Paul the idols represent rivals who challenge the allegiance of Christian worshippers. Unbelievers pose a potential threat because they are linked to the idols by their association with the idol temples.495 The unbelievers Paul is referring to are most likely, according to Barnett, those who frequent and worship at the Greco-Roman cults.496 In essence Paul calls for a total separation of the Corinthian believers from the “local temple cults.”497 At issue here for Paul is the rivalry of worship, namely, the worship of God and the worship of idols.498 Paul will not tolerate compromise; only God is to be worshipped to the exclusion of all others. The Corinthians believers are not to be joined with the cultic worship practices of the unbelieving Corinthians.499 As God’s temple they belong exclusively to him. Anything that is worshipped apart from God is seen by Paul as idolatry, which for him constitutes false worship. We observed this above in our examination of Rom 1:21, 23, and 25 where the height of human sin and rebellion is the rendering of worship to that, which is of the category of “creature” and / or “creation” instead of God the creator who is worthy to receive all glory and honor from his creatures.500 Paul also addresses this false worship as degeneration into gross idolatry. Of all his letters, Paul addresses the issue of idols mostly in the Corinthian letters.501 Paul heightens the idea of the community as the temple of God by citing God himself, kaqw.j ei=pen o` qeo.j / “as God said” (2 Cor 6:16). God is presented as in communication with his temple / community. This reinforces the position that worship involves a relationship and an important ingredient of a relationship is communication. God communicates with his worshippers and in this

DESCRIPTION OF PAULINE WORSHIP IN LIGHT OF LANGUAGE

| 143

context the divine call is to separate from false forms of worship. Their allegiance is to God alone, and this allegiance must never be compromised. The context of 2 Cor 6:14–18 is that of worship, to put it more bluntly, true worship versus false worship.502 The two rivals are the temple of God and the idols, and they are in Paul’s mind mutually exclusive.503 Christian believers cannot serve both.504 Paul asserts there is no agreement between the two and that they are incompatible (2 Cor 6:16). At the root of Paul’s argument is the worship of God which Paul connects to the identity of the faith community as God’s temple. The Corinthian believers are in relationship with God, they are a new creation in Christ (2 Cor 5:17), and as such, they now belong to the God and Father who purchased them and made them his children in Christ. As members of his family they are not to dishonor or betray God by giving their allegiance to others. In summary, Paul employs the metaphor of the temple both in a collective (1 Cor 3:16–17; Eph 2:21–22) and individualistic sense (1 Cor 6:19–20) to the faith community. In the first case, he applies the metaphor collectively to the whole worshipping community. Together they constitute the temple of God, and the Spirit of God is present among them. In the latter case, the bodies of believers are a temple of the Holy Spirit. The common denominator in the temple metaphor is that it denotes the presence of God in and with his people. In 2 Cor 6:16–18, Paul addresses the subject of rival temples by reinforcing the idea that the Christian worshipping community is collectively the temple of the living God as opposed to the temple of idols which are dead and lifeless. In identifying the worshipping community as the temple of the living God, Paul is arguing that God’s presence is a reality among them, and this presence becomes the basis and purpose for worship (cf. 1 Cor 14:25). As God lives in and walks among his people, the assumption is made that he is intimately related to his people, and that he is present to hear them, answer them, and receive the proper honor from them by way of various levels of action which I argue constitutes worship. The temple metaphor also communicates the idea of possession. Since the faith community is God’s temple or the temple of God, they are his own possession, and this raises the notion of allegiance to him. The notion of allegiance by implication eliminates all other allegiances to other masters. Thus Paul argues from this that Christian believers cannot worship God and idols at the same time. Their allegiance and worship must be undivided. They are to worship God alone without exception. With the metaphor of the temple in terms of possession, Paul also reminds his worshipping community that they are sons and daughters, children of God, and as such they are obligated in rendering honor and reverence to their heavenly parent God, whom Paul states has become Father to them in Jesus Christ.

CHAPTER FIVE

Practical Expressions of Worship in the Pauline Letters

In the preceding chapter, I examined the various words and language Paul utilized for worship. In this chapter, I will proceed to examine the practical expressions and actions that Paul uses to denote the act of worship. These expressions are also indicative of the levels of action (point 2 of the worship criteria) which are exercised by the worshipper to God. Louw and Nida refer to these as “worship expressed in an idiomatic manner.”1 I will refer to practical expressions and idioms of worship as synonymous in this chapter. In this regard, I am moving now to actions and not specific concepts associated with worship. While still dealing with words in this chapter that are associated with worship, these words are not generally translated in English as “worship” as the words latreu,w, latrei,a, seba,zomai, proskune,w, and qrhskei,a are. There is an overlap between the specific concepts and words meaning “worship,” and the actions which will be surveyed. At the same time while I am treating practical expressions and actions in this chapter, I also acknowledge that some of the words for “worship” above, which have been examined, also denote actions as some of those words are verbs (latreu,w, seba,zomai, proskune,w). An overlap between a concept or word for worship and a practical expression or action that denotes worship can be seen, for instance, in the word proskune,w, which Paul uses once in 1 Cor 14:25. While this word can be translated “worship,”2 it also carries the notion of action in terms of prostrating oneself and falling on one’s knees. These actions, which we will explore, function more as subsets of the concepts associated with worship.

146

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

One’s actions and response to God seem to be much more significant for Paul than the use of any one word as we have seen, since Paul does not use any one specific word for “worship.” Worship as I noted is action for Paul, a level of action that involves honoring, acknowledging, loving, glorifying, and praising God. Since worship is expressive in form, Paul encouraged his communities to live out their faith, and in so doing they would be offering worship to God (Rom 6:13; 12:1–2). Paul’s understanding on this level of action in worship is summed up by him in 1 Cor 10:31: ei;te ou=n evsqi,ete ei;te pi,nete ei;te ti poiei/te pa,nta eivj do,xan qeou/ poiei/te / “Therefore whether you eat or drink or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God.”3 In examining the area of the practical expressions and characteristics of worship in Paul, it is necessary to pay attention to some idioms that have come to be identified with worship. Louw and Nida rightly point out that: [I]n a number of languages worship is expressed in an idiomatic manner, for example, ‘to bow down before,’ ‘to lower one’s head before,’ ‘to raise one’s arms to,’ ‘to sing to,’ ‘to honor.’ It is important in selecting an expression for worship to employ a term or phrase which will include various aspects of worship.4

Louw and Nida recognize that there are several and various expressions and idioms related to worship. It should be noted that the expressions enumerated by Louw and Nida are all verbs: they denote and express action, or as I term them, “levels of action.” Implied in these acts are the subject, who is the worshipper either individually or communally, and the object, who is the worshipped, in this case God. Louw and Nida also acknowledge that there are “various aspects of worship,” so that worship is multifaceted. The multifaceted nature of worship seen in various practical expressions can be seen in the Second Temple Jewish text of Sirach 50. This text appears to be the most extensive description of Second Temple worship. In this passage, Sirach recounts in glowing terms the religious ministry of the high priest Simon in the temple, and the corporate worship of the people of Israel. Among the practical expressions for worship found in Sir 50, there is: singing (50:18), prayer (50:19), lifting up of the hands (50:20), blessing (50:20–22), shouting, and sounding the trumpets (50:16), and prostrating and bowing (50:17). In this section, I will survey the following practical expressions for worship in Paul: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

invocation prayer wish prayers hymns baptism Eucharist

PRACTICAL EXPRESSIONS OF WORSHIP IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

| 147

5.1. Invocation The first expression or idiom which will be examined is that of invocation. One of the ways in which the Pauline communities expressed their worship was by means of invocation. The word Paul uses for invocation is evpikale,w. Paul uses this verb five times in his church letters (Rom 10:12–14 [evpikale,w used 3 times]; 1 Cor 1:2; 2 Cor 1:23), and it appears once in the Pastoral Letters (2 Tim 2:22), for a total of six times in the Pauline corpus. BDAG5 provides four definitions for this verb which are as follows: 1. 2. 3. 4.

to call upon deity for any purpose, invoke to address or characterize someone by a special term, call, give a surname a request put to a higher judicial authority for review of a decision in a lower court, appeal to invoke in an oath, call on someone as a witness

BDAG gives as the first meaning of evpikale,w the act of calling upon a deity or invoking a deity. Morris notes that the language of invocation “is the language of the suppliant to deity.”6 In the Greco-Roman texts, invocation played a part in the worship of the gods7 as evidenced in the classical Hellenistic literature from Plato to Epictetus.8 Invocation (evpikale,w) in the Greco-Roman context and in the biblical context usually involves the calling on or the calling upon the name of the deities or deity.9 It is used by Xenophon to refer to soldiers invoking the gods for aid on the battlefield.10 Plato uses it of invoking god in the singular, and gods and goddesses as well as linking invocation with prayer.11 Polybius also uses it for invoking the gods.12 In a number of hymnic prayers, it was also common to invoke the deity. A hymnic prayer of Apuleius begins by an invocation of the deity and also includes an invocation to the goddess who is the queen of heaven.13 Cleanthes’s Hymn to Zeus begins with the invocation, “Thou, O Zeus, art praised above all gods.”14 The practice of invoking the deity or deities was a commonality shared both by biblical and non biblical religions. In some cases in the Greco-Roman world, a certain deity can be invoked by various names. In Cleanthes’s Hymn to Zeus while he invokes Zeus as seen above, he states concerning Zeus, “many are thy names.”15 In Apuleius’s hymn to the queen of heaven, multiple names are invoked, “whether thou art Ceres . . . or the heavenly Venus . . . or Prosperine.”16 The idea of invoking a deity or deities is also attested in the Latin letter of Pliny the Younger to the Emperor Trajan in 112 CE where he writes, Propositus est libellus sine auctore multorum nomina continens. Qui negabant esse se Christianos aut fuisse, cum praeeunte me deos appellarent et imagini tuae, quam propter hoc iusseram cum simulacris numinum afferri, ture ac vino supplicarent.17

148

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

Among these I considered that I should dismiss anyone who denied that they were or ever had been Christians when they repeated after me a formula of invocation to the gods and had made offerings of wine and incense to your statue.

Philo also speaks of invocations in the context of the worship of God.18 BDAG reveals that of the four definitions enumerated for evpikale,w above, Paul subscribes to definitions 1 and 4.19 I will focus mainly on definition 1 on Paul’s use of evpikale,w in 1 Cor 1:2, Rom 10:12–14, and its use in the Pastoral letter of 2 Tim 2:22.20 The word evpikale,w as noted is a term which was part of both the GrecoRoman and Jewish religious context and would have been a term Paul was familiar with as he employs it in his letters. As we shall see this was also the word used in the LXX for invoking God, and Paul would have also been familiar with this Greek text of the OT as he cites it in his letters. Paul would thus be familiar with both the Greco-Roman and Jewish use of evpikale,w in a religious context.21 The verb evpikale,w usually appears in a context of worship.22 The term evpikale,w can include as Capes notes “elements of worship, adoration, and obedience,” however, “it primarily signified prayer.”23 Longenecker lists the verb evpikale,w among a series of words which Paul used to denote the act of prayer,24 as does Stanley in his analysis of the terminology of prayer in Paul,25 a subject which will be addressed shortly below. The signification of this term with prayer lies in the action of addressing God by the worshipper by calling on his name. The biblical roots of this action are found in the OT where YHWH is the divine object of the invocation,26 or the calling on or of his name. The roots of the act of invocation to YHWH are also attested in Second Temple Judaism.27 Hurtado notes that the phrase “to call upon the name of the LORD” in the OT is “a ritual action of worship.”28 Peter O’Brien also comments “in the OT ‘calling upon the name of the LORD’ means ‘to confess to Yahweh in praise and worship.’”29 Thus invocation constitutes an expression or act of worship. The same expression was used of the worship of the pagan deities in the OT as seen in the invocation of Baal (1 Kgs 18:24–26).30 The non-worshippers of God are described as those who “do not call on your name” (LXX Jer 10:25; Ps 79:6 (MT); LXX Ps 78:6), with the implication being that they ß y> ~veBî . ar"q± y. 31 I and its parallel call on the name of their gods. The Hebrew phrase hw"h in the LXX, evpikale,shtai to. o;noma kuri,ou thus becomes a technical idiom or phrase for worship.32 A number of texts from the LXX indicate that the formulaic phrase evpikale,shtai to. o;noma kuri,ou became a standard one for the worship of God in the OT as the following texts from the LXX indicate: evpikalei/sqai to. o;noma kuri,ou tou/ qeou/ / “to call on the name of the Lord God.” (Gen 4:26) kai. evpekale,sato evkei/ Abram to. o;noma kuri,ou / “and Abram there called on the name of the Lord.” (Gen 13:4)

PRACTICAL EXPRESSIONS OF WORSHIP IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

| 149

kai. evpekale,sato evkei/ to. o;noma kuri,ou qeo.j aivw,nioj / “and [Abraham] called there on the name of the Lord, the everlasting God.” (Gen 21:33)33 kai. wv|kodo,mhsen evkei/ qusiasth,rion kai. evpekale,sato to. o;noma kuri,ou / “And he [Isaac] built there an altar, and called on the name of the Lord.” (Gen 26:25)34 kai. evpika,lesai, me evn h`me,ra| qli,yewj kai. evxelou/mai, se / “And call upon me in the day of affliction; and I will deliver thee, and thou shalt glorify me.” (Ps 49:15; MT: Ps 50:15) poth,rion swthri,ou lh,myomai kai. to. o;noma kuri,ou evpikale,somai / “I will take the cup of salvation, and call upon the name of the Lord.” (Ps 115:4; MT: Ps 116:13) kai. e;stai pa/j o]j a'n evpikale,shtai to. o;noma kuri,ou swqh,setai / “And it shall come to pass that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.” (Joel 2:32; MT: Joel 3:5) tou/ evpikalei/sqai pa,ntaj to. o;noma kuri,ou / “that all may call on the name of the Lord.” (Zeph 3:9) auvto.j evpikale,setai to. o;noma, mou kavgw. evpakou,somai auvtw/| kai. evrw/ lao,j mou ou-to,j evstin kai. auvto.j evrei/ ku,rioj o` qeo,j mou / “they shall call upon my name, and I will hear them, and say, This is my people: and they shall say, The Lord is my God.” (Zech 13:9) o[ti dia. tou/to e;dwkaj to.n fo,bon sou evpi. kardi,an h`mw/n tou/ evpikalei/sqai to. o;noma, sou / “For you have put the fear of you in our hearts so that we would call upon your name.” (Bar 3:7) kai. ei=pen Ioudiq evxa,rcete tw/| qew/| mou evn tumpa,noij a;|sate tw/| kuri,w| evn kumba,loij evnarmo,sasqe auvtw/| yalmo.n kai. ai=non u`you/te kai. evpikalei/sqe to. o;noma auvtou/  / “And Judith said, ‘Begin a song to my God with tambourines, sing to my Lord with cymbals. Raise to him a new psalm; exalt him, and call upon his name.’” (Jdt 16:1)

These texts demonstrate that the calling on the name of the Lord shows or at least implies that worship is being intended.35 Invocation also implies that God is one who is attentive and able to respond to the supplication of the worshipper when he or she calls on his name.36 The calling on the name of the Lord also implies a relationship between the worshipper and God. Here we recall my proposed criteria. In the act of invocation, we have the subject who is the active participant. The level of action involves the act of invoking or calling upon the name of the object who is usually a superhuman entity. Since God is the object of such invocation in the texts cited above from the LXX, it can be concluded that this is a religious context, and based on my criteria this constitutes worship. The notion of calling on God’s name by the worshipper while expressing an act of worship also

150

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

underlines the importance of relationship with God. Appealing to God’s name implies a relational religious act. The OT also speaks of the people of God, which are de facto also the worshippers of God, as also being called by God’s name. The idea of bearing the name of someone carries with it the notion of belonging to that person or being related to the person whose name one bears,37 and usually this would be understood along familial lines.38 The relationship which God has with his people is described as one of possession, which recalls 1 Cor 6:20 where Paul reminded the Corinthians that they were bought with a price and so the proper response should be one of service to God and / or Christ.39 In the OT, Israel is the people of God because they are called by his name. Orr and Walther note that when the name of God is applied to his people, it denotes a possession of the people on God’s part.40 The idea of naming something after one’s name communicated the idea of possession.41 The temple of YHWH is also said to be his because it is the house he chose to be called by his name (Jer 7:10–11,14; 1 Macc 7:37; Bar 2:26). In Ezek 44:28, YHWH is also said to be the inheritance and possession, particularly of the Levitical priests.42 In 2 Chr 7:14, YHWH refers to Israel as ymiv.-ar"q.nI rv,a] yMi[; / “my people who are called by my name.”43 Another important text for consideration is Isa 43:6–7,

yt;Anb.W qAxr"me yn:b' yaiybih' yail'k.Ti-la; !m'ytel.W ynITe !ApC'l; rm;ao6 #rc;y> wytiar"B. ydIAbk.liw> ymiv.bi ar"q.NIh; lKo7 wytiyfi[]-@a; 6I

will say to the north, “Give them up!” and to the south, “Do not hold them back.” Bring my sons from afar and my daughters from the ends of the earth—7 everyone who is called by my name, whom I created for my glory, whom I formed and made (NIV).44

What should be noticed here is that those whom YHWH identifies as “everyone who is called by my name” (Isa 43:7a) are also called by him “my sons” and “my daughters” (Isa 43:6b). Here the child-parent relationship is evident where YHWH is the parent and his worshippers are his sons and daughters. It was noted above that the concept of Christian worshippers being sons and daughters of God was also enunciated by Paul in 2 Cor 6:18 where he quotes from the Isaianic passage noted above (Isa 43:6), but possibly also from Hos 1:10.45 What is also important in this text is the purpose for which YHWH claims he has created his worshippers, those who are called by his name. YHWH has created his worshippers who are his sons and daughters “for my glory.” Here is the reason why YHWH created, formed, and made his worshippers: for his ultimate glory. The theme of the ultimate glory of God also becomes central for Paul as will be seen in chapter 6.

PRACTICAL EXPRESSIONS OF WORSHIP IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

| 151

The target, goal, and mark of worship is the rendering of glory to God by his worshippers who are identified variously as God’s servants, but also his sons and daughters, his children. I have noted above that the rendering of glory to God is constitutive of worship because it communicates the rendering of honor and respect to God, and the rightful acknowledgment of the attribution of such virtues to God. When we come to Paul, the invocation formula of calling on the name of the Lord, or YHWH, found in the OT, is also present. We will examine the two Pauline passages in which the invocation formula is employed by Paul. I will begin first by examining the shorter of the two passages, 1 Cor 1:2. Secondly, I will examine the longer passage in Rom 10:12–14, although I will treat the surrounding context that is also relevant to vv. 12–14, and thus Rom 10:9–14 will aso be examined as well.

5.1.1. 1 Corinthians 1:2 th/| evkklhsi,a| tou/ qeou/ th/| ou;sh| evn Kori,nqw| h`giasme,noij evn Cristw/| VIhsou/ klhtoi/j a`gi,oij su.n pa/sin toi/j evpikaloume,noij to. o;noma tou/ kuri,ou h`mw/n VIhsou/ Cristou/ evn panti. to,pw| auvtw/n kai. h`mw/n / “To the church of God that is in Corinth, to those sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints together with all who call upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ in every place, their [Lord] and ours.”46

In this text Paul addresses his letter to the church of God in Corinth. He indicates that the Corinthian worshipping community belongs first and foremost to God (cf. 1 Cor 3:9).47 They are God’s church in the locale of Corinth. He further identifies the Corinthian believers as those who are sanctified, or set apart in Christ. The idea of being “sanctified” (h`giasme,noij) carries with it the notion of dedication to God. Louw and Nida note that the meaning of the root word a`gia,zw is “to dedicate to the service of and to loyalty to deity—‘to consecrate, consecration, to dedicate to God, dedication’”48 and that “the emphasis [of a`gia,zw] is not upon a manner of life but upon religious activity and observances which reflect one’s dedication or consecration to God.”49 Here it should noted that the emphasis of a`gia,zw involves primarily “one’s dedication” to God. In Christ Jesus, Paul informs the Corinthians that they have been set apart, sanctified, and consecrated to be dedicated to God. This aspect of this action is described as a finished one as h`giasme,noij is a perfect passive participle.50 This dedication to God implies a relationship, and it is in the dynamics of the relationship between God and his servants that worship takes place. The idea of dedication to God recalls the treatment above of Rom 12:1 where Paul commands the Roman Christians to offer up their bodies as living sacrifices to God which are to be pleasing and acceptable. In Rom 6:13, Paul admonished them to offer up their very selves. It was also noted that the language Paul employed in Rom

152

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

12:1 was borrowed from the context of the Levitical sacrifices mentioned in the OT.51 The idea of sacrifice is intricately tied to and evokes worship. Thus in 1 Cor 1:2 Paul seems to also be borrowing the language of the temple and sacrifice to convey the idea that believers have been sanctified like the sacrifices and utensils of the temple,52 set apart to full dedication to God, and such dedication is expressed in the level of action which translates into worship. Here Paul can speak metaphorically53 of believers as consecrated items like that of the temple cult, a point as noted, Paul made in Rom 12:1 in respect to believers being (living) sacrifices. Fee further notes the OT background of the verb h`giasme,noij when he comments that it “has a rich OT background, whereby what was formerly profane or ordinary has been consecrated, and thus set apart, strictly for divine purposes.”54 Raymond Collins notes that Paul’s vocabulary concerning holiness and sanctification “[i]s not typical of the jargon found in Hellenistic letters . . . Both terms belong to the semantic domain of the [Jewish temple] cult.”55 The consecration or sanctification of the believer like the OT sacrifices makes them God’s possession56 and as such they are to express as Louw and Nida noted,57 loyalty to God in service to him which is manifested most clearly in worship. The language of sanctification is closely associated with the call by Paul for the Corinthian believers to be a`gi,oij / “saints.”58 A saint, or holy one, is one who has been called (klhto,j) to be set apart by God, and thus means according to Thiselton a holy person, one who is dedicated to God.59 Note here again the notion of possession, God has called believers in Christ to be set apart and become his possession. Paul goes on to mention that their consecration or sanctification in Christ and their calling to be holy applies to all believers, in every place, not just the Corinthians. He notes that the Corinthians share this spiritual privilege su.n pa/sin .  .  . evn panti. to,pw / “with all . . . in every place,” a reference to other believers. As Morris notes, Paul widens his salutation to encompass all believers everywhere.60 Thiselton asserts that Paul associates the other churches with Corinth.61 T. W. Manson makes the interesting note that the phrase evn panti. to,pw| should be taken to mean “every place of worship.”62 The action that Paul writes that Christians in Corinth with all who in every place practices is toi/j evpikaloume,noij to. o;noma tou/ kuri,ou h`mw/n VIhsou/ Cristou / “those who call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.”63 This phrase becomes a descriptor of Christian believers: they are those who call on the name of the Lord Jesus.64 What is also significant about this phrase is that it demonstrates that Paul believed the risen Jesus could be invoked or called upon anywhere the faith community assembled for worship. The source for the invocation of the risen Jesus is most likely not to be found in Greco-Roman religion.65 The invocation of the risen Jesus in Christian worship is markedly and vastly different from that of the worship of Greco-Roman heroes whose worship was usually associated and connected with

PRACTICAL EXPRESSIONS OF WORSHIP IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

| 153

their tombs or relics. Daniel A. Smith thus comments that in contrast to the hero worship of Greco-Roman religion: “the worship of Christ was not connected with his tomb or his relics, as often hero worship was.”66 Schmidt67 notes that Paul’s use of this phrase from the OT in application to Jesus reveals “a strong influence of the LXX.”68 This phrase is a very unusual one because the referent of evpikale,w in this case is the risen Jesus, not God.69 One would expect Paul to have God as the referent of the invocation at this point since this appears to be the regular practice in the LXX. The reason this is unusual is because invocation in a religious context especially in the OT and in Second Temple Jewish texts including Greco-Roman sources is an act whereby God or a god is called upon usually in an act of prayer.70 Josephus as an example of late Second Temple Judaism uses the term evpikale,w to refer to the invocation of pagan gods in his recounting of the story of Elijah on Mount Carmel (1 Kgs 18:1–40) where the priests of Baal are said to au`tw/n evpikale,sasqai qeou,j / “call on their gods.”71 God in the biblical tradition, a god, or the gods in Greco-Roman religion are the usual objects of invocation. It should be noted that here we encounter a significant Pauline contribution to the area of Christian worship. Paul appears to include the risen Jesus within Christian worship.72 I recall my proposed criteria again. In 1 Cor 1:2, the subject(s) are the Corinthian faith community as well as other believers in every place. The level of action is their invocation of the name of the Lord Jesus. The object of this invocation is clearly the risen Jesus. The fact that the Corinthian faith community invokes the risen Jesus suggests that he occupies a higher and superior position, and that the Corinthian church is dependent on the risen Jesus. We have criteria for relationship established here of an inferior / minor subject in relation to a superior / major object. The issue is whether this relationship provides a religious context, which according to my criteria is necessary for worship. In presenting a formula of invocation where the risen Jesus is the intended object, Paul is borrowing formulaic language from the religious context of the OT where YHWH is the intended object of invocatory address. We recall Schmidt’s note that Paul’s use of this phrase from the OT in application to Jesus reveals “a strong influence of the LXX.”73 Since YHWH is the regular object of this address, we have a religious context where worship takes place. Paul also borrows passages from the LXX as we shall see in Rom 10:9–14 where he clearly identifies the risen Lord (ku,rioj) Jesus with the ku,rioj (YHWH; MT) of the LXX,74 and he equates the calling on the name of the ku,rioj in the LXX with the calling on the name of the ku,rioj Jesus.75 Moreover, on a secondary point, we have also seen that when the verb evpikale,w is used in Greco-Roman sources it denotes invoking a deity or deities, which also establishes a religious context and therefore worship takes place. This indicates that the term evpikale,w was understood in both biblical and Greco-Roman contexts to refer to a relational religious act where a deity is invoked.

154

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

When we take these factors into consideration, it appears by a deductive analysis that the context of invoking the risen Jesus is a religious one, and therefore, we seem to have a case for worship here where the risen Jesus becomes an object of worship. The presumption of invoking the risen Jesus presupposes that he is attentive and available to hear those who invoke him. Orr and Walther capture this sense when they note that, “[t]o appeal to the name means that Christ is accepted as a living person, definitely known, ready to come to their aid and give them authority to be his representatives on earth.”76 The meaning expressed in the invocation of Jesus has been noted by a number of scholars to indicate and express worship to Jesus.77 Dunn notes that: “There is certainly evidence that Jesus was invoked or besought in Christian worship and prayer.”78 Hurtado notes regarding the practice of invoking the risen Jesus that “this regularized place of Christ in such prayer is without parallel in Jewish groups.”79 Gerhard Delling casts doubt on this phrase of calling on the name of the Lord Jesus as an expression of prayer and argues rather that it is an expression meaning: “to name a name” whereby the Christian would confess the name of Christ, thus its primary meaning is that of confessing.80 Delling further argues that to interpret this phrase as a reference to prayer would be to rob it of its meaning.81 It is Delling’s conviction that any form of common prayer to Christ in early Christianity “is not convincingly demonstrated.”82 Delling however, seems to ignore the importance of the language used in this text, which as noted above is the same language used of invoking YHWH in the OT and Second Temple Judaism. Delling also seems to be at variance at this point with the primary definition of evpikale,w given by BDAG, which defines this verb as an address to “call upon deity.”83 It is rather according to Delling: “belonging to Christ that is the decisive factor in the context.”84 While the idea of belonging to Christ by calling on his name is certainly inherent in the idea of invocation, it was noted above that the idea of invoking YHWH’s name also communicates the idea that those who do so, his worshippers, also belong to YHWH as his possession.85 For this reason the people of Israel are said to be the people of YHWH who are called by his name (2 Chr 7:14) thus implying possession or their belonging to YHWH. Delling’s weakness at this point is reflected in the fact that he does not address the rich textual sources of the OT and Second Temple Judaism where, as noted, this expression is multiply attested and used in the context of worship and prayer to YHWH. Those who called on YHWH’s name were not only those who belonged to him, but also those who invoked his name in their prayers and worship settings. Similarly, Paul uses the same language in 1 Cor 1:2 to convey the belonging of his communities to Christ, but also the striking factor, is the similarity with Paul’s invocation language with that of the OT. Thiselton points out that the main source for this invocation formula in 1 Cor 1:2 is that of calling on the name of YHWH, or as the LXX renders

PRACTICAL EXPRESSIONS OF WORSHIP IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

| 155

it, the “Lord” (Joel 2:32).86 The origin of the invocation to Jesus has been noted by numerous scholars to be rooted in the OT passage of Joel 2:32 (3:5; MT)87, a passage which will be examined more fully in my treatment of Rom 10:9–14. Gordon Wiles comments regarding 1 Cor 1:2 that it “raises the much debated question whether Paul addressed prayers to Jesus,”88 but while Wiles is willing to concede that the phrase in 1 Cor 1:2 “seems to indicate that in some way he [Paul] did,” Wiles still maintains that “the indirect form of address allows ambiguity.”89 Wiles is not clear as to what is ambiguous about this form of address which he holds to be “indirect.” There does not appear to be any ambiguity in the text, the referents or subjects toi/j evpikaloume,noij to. o;noma tou/ kuri,ou h`mw/n VIhsou/ Cristou are clearly shown to be the “saints” in the Corinthian community who exercise a level of action wherein they call on the name of “our Lord Jesus” who is the object. Wiles further comments that: “Perhaps Jesus was regarded as the divine agent of the requested action.”90 While for Paul, Jesus functions as the divine agent of God’s actions (1 Cor 8:6; Col 1:16), 1 Cor 1:2 in its immediate context does not seem to convey that notion. The language employed in 1 Cor 1:2 as most scholars have acknowledged is borrowed from the OT where it does function as a form of address to YHWH as the object.91 The only place in Paul where evpikale,w is used of God is in 2  Cor 1:23. This text, however, does not deal with Christian worship, but rather, Paul uses evpikale,w in the context of taking an oath to assert the veracity of his apostolic claims.92 All other uses of evpikale,w are used by Paul in a worship context, but the referent is the risen Jesus instead of God (1 Cor 1:2; Rom 10:12–14; 2 Tim 2:22).93 David Capes also notes regarding evpikale,w that it is used in the NT only in reference to Jesus, not God.94 As our earliest writer, Paul is the first Christian writer to place Jesus in such a context of worship.95 The assumption inherent in the idea that the risen Jesus can be invoked in the faith community is that he is experienced as alive and present with them, and that can he can hear them when they call on his name. We examined a similar parallel to this above in Paul’s description of the faith community as the temple of God where the metaphor of the temple highlights the presence of God in and with his people, with the implication that he can hear them (2 Cor 6:16–18).96 It appears to be assumed as well that if the risen Jesus can be invoked in the faith community, this means that he is believed to have the ability to respond. The presence of the risen Jesus in the faith community thus prompts the practical expression of invocation to him as a level of action. The aspect of worship that is seen in this practical expression of invocation is one of dependence. When the worshipper invokes the deity, it is to call upon that deity for help, aid, or to make a request. It can be an invocation to be delivered from a dangerous or perilous situation, or for a plea for salvation. Invocation also implies the element of acknowledgment and honor. To invoke the deity is to acknowledge

156

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

the deity by name and to render honor by recognizing the deity’s power and ability to answer. At this point we must return to the definition of worship set out at the beginning of this study. We have argued that worship is a personal relational religious act between a human subject, either individually or collectively in a group, and God (or a god). The human subject is functionally the worshipper, the one who performs the level of action, or act of worship, and God is functionally the worshipped object, the one who receives the act of worship.97 The Lord Jesus in this case is the object of the invocation and hence the recipient who receives the invocation from the worshipping faith community. There is thus within 1 Cor 1:2 both a personal relational aspect between the worshipping community and the risen Jesus, and there is action expressed by way of the level of action of invocation, and since the context is religious, we have deduced that worship is being exercised here. Ferdinand Hahn has noted that, “[t]he address of Jesus as Lord . . . makes it necessary to speak of a worship of Jesus.”98 Capes similarly comments that the use of evpikale,w “indicates that Paul thought believers should offer prayers to the risen Lord Jesus who would respond by bestowing on them divine riches.”99 Given the point that Paul now includes the risen Jesus within the parameters of worship, we must also include in my proposed definition of worship, that the Pauline worshipping communities were not only in a personal religious relationship with God, but they were also in a personal religious relationship with the risen Jesus. What can be deduced from the examination of 1 Cor 1:2 is that the risen Jesus was invoked in the Pauline Christian communities. This practice was both communal and widespread among other Christian worshipping communities known to Paul. The invocation of the risen Jesus is not explained in the immediate context of 1 Cor 1:2 but simply presumed as a recognized practice in the Pauline churches, a practice that they seem familiar with. The root of the invocation formula in 1 Cor 1:2 is linked to the OT invocation passages, principally among them Joel 2:32,100 which will now be examined.

5.1.2. Romans 10:9–14 9 o[ti eva.n o`mologh,sh|j to, r`h/ma, evn tw/| sto,mati, sou o[ti ku,rioj VIhsou/j kai. pisteu,sh|j evn th/| kardi,a| sou o[ti o` qeo.j auvto.n h;geiren evk nekrw/n swqh,sh|\ 10 kardi,a| ga.r pisteu,etai eivj dikaiosu,nhn sto,mati de. o`mologei/tai eivj swthri,an 11 le,gei ga.r h` grafh, Pa/j o` pisteu,wn evp auvtw/| ouv kataiscunqh,setai 12 ouv ga,r evstin diastolh. VIoudai,ou te kai. {Ellhnoj o` ga.r auvto.j ku,rioj pa,ntwn ploutw/n eivj pa,ntaj tou.j evpikaloume,nouj auvto,n\ 13 Pa/j ga.r o]j a'n evpikale,shtai to. o;noma kuri,ou swqh,setai 14 Pw/j ou=n evpikale,swntai eivj o]n ouvk evpi,steusan pw/j de. pisteu,swsin ou- ouvk h;kousan pw/j de. avkou,swsin cwri.j khru,ssontoj

PRACTICAL EXPRESSIONS OF WORSHIP IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

| 157

9

That if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead you shall be saved.10 For with the heart one believes to righteousness and with the mouth confession is made to salvation. 11 For it is written, “All who believe on him will not be ashamed.” 12 For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek for the same Lord over all is rich to all who call upon him. 13 For “everyone who calls upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.”14 How then shall they call upon him in whom they have not believed? And how can they believe in him of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching?

We will turn now to examine the longer Pauline passage in which the invocation formula is also employed by Paul in Rom 10:12–14. As noted above I will treat the surrounding context that is also relevant to vv. 12–14, namely, Rom 10:9–14. This text is particularly important because of the connection it makes with invocation and the Christian confession regarding Jesus as Lord and his resurrection. This text is also important because of the citation from the OT that Paul makes within the context of invocation and its referent. Equally important to this is Paul’s emphasis on what God has done in Jesus, particularly in his death and resurrection, with a greater emphasis being placed on the latter. All worship in the Christian communities according to Paul has been modeled and framed from the perspective of what God has done through Jesus, and in turn Christian worship is now rendered to God through Jesus. The place of the risen Jesus is important in Christian worship because of the identification of believers with him in their relationship to God and vice versa.101 Paul frequently speaks of Christian believers as being “in Christ,” and this expression appears about eighty-three times in the Pauline corpus102 being a “distinctively Pauline feature.”103 Paul also uses similar phrases such as being “in the Lord” and “in the Lord Jesus.”104 While Paul speaks generally of believers being “in Christ,” he speaks once in his earliest letter to the Thessalonian believers of them being evn qew/| patri. kai. kuri,w| VIhsou/ Cristw/|  / “in God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Thess 1:1) so that they are conjointly in God and the risen Jesus. The idea of being “in Christ” according to Paul carries two important elements: 1. 2.

Christ is the one through whom God has acted to redeem the world. This is the instrumental sense, because Christ is the means of salvation. Christ is the place where believers are located. This is the local or incorporative sense, because believers are united with the crucified and risen Christ.105

In short, we see a two-way relationship where (1)  God has acted towards believers through the risen Jesus in saving them, and (2) believers now respond to God in worship through the risen Jesus with whom they are now identified. The risen Jesus functions in this respect as an agent, a mediator (cf. 1 Tim 2:5), or in Neyrey’s words “a broker” between two parties, namely, God and humanity.106

158

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

The importance of the risen Jesus is seen in Rom 10:9 where Paul stresses that salvation is actualized on two points: (1)  the oral confession that Jesus is Lord (ku,rioj VIhsou/j), and (2) the belief in one’s heart that God has raised Jesus from the dead.107 Here we encounter the essence of what Paul believed about the gospel: Jesus is Lord, and he is the one whom God has raised from the dead (cf. 1 Cor 15:3–4; 1 Thess 1:10). Paul thus fuses together as corollary conditions to salvation both the lordship of Jesus, and his resurrection from the dead by God. Dodd comments on Rom 10:9 that “[t]his is the only passage where he [Paul] seems to equate saving faith with belief in a certain proposition [the resurrection of Jesus].”108 Romans 10:9 becomes the launch pad for what Paul will say in verses 10–13.109 The confession ku,rioj VIhsou/j has long been recognized in scholarship as very early, and perhaps the earliest single confession in early Christianity.110 When Paul uses this confession, it always takes the form “the Lord is Jesus.”111 The confession ku,rioj VIhsou/j / “Jesus is Lord” is well known to Paul as he cites it elsewhere (1 Cor 12:3; 2 Cor 4:5; Phil 2:11; Col 2:6).112 The idea of creedal confession in a worship setting is already attested in the OT,113 which would have most likely influenced Paul. This confession (“Jesus is Lord”) was the mark of a Christian in the early church.114 It became the “distinguishing mark of a Christian”;115 “to confess Him as Lord is to declare oneself a Christian (Rom. x.  9; 1  Cor. xii.  3).”116 It also served as “the line of demarcation between believer and nonbeliever.”117 Richard Longenecker agues that it probably emerged “from the earliest stratum of Christian conviction.”118 David Capes comments that: The confession “Jesus is Lord” (ku,rion VIhsou/n), employed by Paul here and elsewhere, was rather well-fixed within early Christianity. It arose not in light of persecution but most likely to meet the liturgical needs in the churches, perhaps in baptism or worship.119

Capes notes the well established place of this confession in the early Christian faith community, and it is very possible that the origins of this confession did not begin with Paul, but rather originated with the Aramaic Christian community in a first-century Judean setting.120 The contention of Oscar Cullmann that the development of the confession “Jesus is Lord” arose due to persecution121 is not convincing as Capes has noted. Cullmann later recognized that the situation of persecution could not account for the origin of the confession.122 The most likely origin for the confession “Jesus is Lord” is that it arose, as Capes noted, from the earliest roots of the Christian movement in the context of its “liturgical needs”123 or in the practice of baptism,124 all of which I submit and Capes admits comes under the rubric and context of worship, or cultic worship as Martin puts it.125

PRACTICAL EXPRESSIONS OF WORSHIP IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

| 159

Oscar Cullmann also arrived at this conclusion when he commented that “[w] e may assume with certainty that Confessional formulae [such as “Jesus is Lord”] were recited in the early Christian service of worship.”126 The confession “Jesus is Lord” thus appears to have emerged from within the matrix of Christian worship itself, so that there is a co-relation between the confession of Jesus as Lord and the worship of the Christian community. Scholars seem to be agreed that this confession belongs and was uttered in the context of Christian worship.127 A number of scholars such as Delling, Cullmann, Martin, and Aune have noted that the use of confessions in the early Christian movement was part of the dynamics of Christian worship,128 so that the very act of uttering the confession “Jesus is Lord” constituted worship. Elsewhere when Paul employs the confession such as in 1 Cor 12:3,129 the surrounding context bears out that he is speaking on the subject of Christian worship (1 Cor 12–14 where Paul deals mainly with spiritual gifts and their administration and exercise in the worshipping community).130 J. L. Wu has also argued that creedal confessions (such as “Jesus is Lord”) arose among other things in the corporate cultic setting of the worshipping community and such confessions were uttered in public worship.131 One point which tends to be neglected is the nature of one making a confession or vow of someone’s lordship, thus demonstrating among other things that one is declaring or vowing his or her loyalty and / or allegiance to a master or lord. Merely declaring one’s loyalty and allegiance to a certain master or lord does not necessarily mean that one is truly loyal; a person must be authentically honest and believe in the one he or she has submitted to. As Fitzmyer notes regarding Rom 10:9, “One must utter the basic Christian confession of faith and mean it.”132 In affirming or declaring Jesus as Lord as a sign of allegiance to him, appears similar to the Roman military practice of making a sacramentum, which was an oath that soldiers made by invoking the gods, and thereby binding themselves to loyalty and obedience. This had to be done with sincere intention, and the solider who made the oath or sacramentum with false intentions would place himself and his family under the wrath of the gods.133 Van Roo notes: “Thus sacramentum had the force of a religious initiation or consecration.”134 Tertullian also knows of the military connotations of sacramentum,135 and he also applies the term sacramentum to baptism in the third century CE.136 It is very possible as a number of scholars have noted that the confession “Jesus is Lord” was associated with baptism which would serve as an initiation rite when Christian believers would make a vow or oath of allegiance to the risen Lord, and part of this initiation would involve an invocation. Foerster comments that the ascription of “lord” does denote the taking of a vow even in a worship context, and in such a context I argue we have a religious act:

160

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

ku,rioj, then, is particularly used in expression of a personal relationship of man to the deity, whether in prayer, thanksgiving or vow, and as a correlate of dou/loj inasmuch as the man concerned describes as ku,rioj the god under whose orders he stands.137

Foerster notes here the use of a vow, but he also set the relationship of the servant (dou/loj) to his lord (ku,rioj) in a worship context where he stands in a position of allegiance to “the god under whose orders he stands.” Here we see a picture of the worshipper under allegiance to his lord to whom he has vowed. Dodd similarly argues that: “The god (Hermes, Serapis, or whoever it might be) was the ‘Lord’ of his worshippers; they his ‘slaves’. It thus implied both a divine status and a sort of ‘covenant’ relationship between the god and his worshippers, who had chosen him as their special patron.”138 Dodd makes some important observations here. The title “Lord” was used of the object of worship. The use of “Lord” in a relationship presupposes servants or “slaves” who are the worshippers in this case, thus the “Lord” in a religious worship context has a “divine status.” The idea of a “‘covenant’ relationship between the god and his worshippers” is an important point. The covenant relationship between the worshippers and the divine object is cemented, realized, or manifested by a public declaration or vow to the effect that the patron deity is “Lord,” and in so doing the worshipper or slave declares his or her allegiance and subservience to that “Lord.” Dodd also notes that YHWH was also given the title “Lord” in the OT and that this denoted “a God who stood in a special covenant relation with his worshippers.”139 This confirms the criteria that worship entails a relational religious act which can be described as the rendering of a level of action such as honor, service, and acknowledgment by the inferior subject(s) to the superior object, who in this case becomes their “patron” or “Lord.” The idea of relationship is inherent in the context of a covenant. This was common both in a Hellenistic and biblical context. When Paul speaks of the risen Jesus as “Lord” and places that title in a confession as he does in Rom 10:9, this presumes that the one making the confession is acknowledging the risen Jesus as his patron, his Lord, and the subject who makes the confession understands himself or herself to be his slave or servant. Thus the confession “Jesus is Lord” reflects a vow of allegiance that is made by a servant or slave to indicate that they belong and are the possession of their Lord. The personal element of the lordship of Jesus over the believer is seen most directly in Paul’s own claim where he refers to the risen Jesus as Cristou/ VIhsou/ tou/ kuri,ou mou / “Christ Jesus my Lord” (Phil 3:8). Erik Waaler notes that confessions (such as “Jesus is Lord”) are similar to the covenant oaths that showed the loyalty of the vassal servant to the king with an emphasis on the uniqueness of the king.140 Dodd again states: “for Paul’s converts the confession Jesus is Lord would suggest that He had chosen them to belong to the community of His worshippers,

PRACTICAL EXPRESSIONS OF WORSHIP IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

| 161

and that, while others might belong to Hermes, Serapis, and the rest, they belonged exclusively to Him.”141 Dodd highlights some important elements here. He recognizes that the confession “Jesus is Lord” suggests that Christ had chosen believers the way a master or lord chooses or takes servants / slaves to himself. Dodd sees this as a context of worship because believers become “His [i.e., Christ’s] worshippers.” Another important point is that of possession or association. By confessing the risen Jesus as Lord, believers thereby declare that they belong exclusively to him. Dodd’s mention of the Greek gods Hermes and Serapis indicates that a confession of lordship in a religious context denotes worship by way of declaring oneself to be the possession or ownership of the lord or deity in question. The exclusive allegiance to the Lord that is confessed presumes a rejection of all other rival lords. Greco-Roman regal inscriptions reveal that Greek kings and despots and later Roman emperors assumed the title “Lord” to themselves, and used it in a divine context to elicit worship and adoration from their subjects.142 The title given to the Roman emperor Sebasto,j carries the meaning of one “worthy of reverence”143 and which is also used adjectivally to refer to gods, temples, and the holy and the sacred.144 Here it should be noted that this word is connected to a religious context and in such a context I argue worship occurs. Foerster also notes that the word Sebasto,j “denotes something to which religious respect is paid.”145 Here then we see a title used by the Roman emperor which places himself within a religious context where he becomes an object of “religious respect” or worship. Foerster thus comments: “The title plays a part where the living emperor is the object of a cult and of worship.”146 That the confession “Jesus is Lord” is associated with worship is further established when we observe that whenever Paul cites this confession it appears in a context of worship:147 1. 2.

3.

Corinthians 12:3—The confession appears where Paul is addressing worship practices in the church (1 Cor 12–14). Phillipians 2:11—The confession appears in a worship context indicated by the act of the universal bowing of every knee and confession of every tongue to the lordship of Jesus which will redound to the glory of God the Father. Corinthians 4:5—The confession appears in a context where Paul sums up his argument in 2 Cor 4:15 to state that all things148 belong to or are for the sake of the Corinthian believers and that as God’s grace spreads to more people, it th.n euvcaristi,an perisseu,sh| eivj th.n do,xan tou/ qeou/ / “may increase thanksgiving, to the glory of God.”149 The rendering of thanksgiving to the glory of God presupposes worship.

The second important point about the confession “Jesus is Lord” is that it is also related to the resurrection of Jesus.150 This is seen in Rom 10:9 where the

162

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

requirements for salvation are set out by Paul as both confessing Jesus as Lord and (kai.) believing in one’s heart that God raised him from the dead. Paul thereby implies a grammatical link and co-relation between the two. It seems that the confession “Jesus is Lord” itself is predicated on the reality of the resurrection of Jesus which is intended to validate the lordship of Jesus. Fee points out that: “the confession of Jesus as Lord is predicated on this prior believing with the heart that through resurrection and exaltation Christ has assumed his present role as Lord of all.”151 This suggests that there is a co-relation between the role or status of Jesus as Lord and his resurrection. Paul makes this connection elsewhere in his letters. In Rom 1:3–4, Paul had asserted that in the resurrection Jesus was declared or shown to be the Son of God with power by the resurrection from the dead. Paul also associates the title of ku,rioj (“Lord”) with the risen Jesus in Rom 1:4. The resurrection of Jesus was for Paul the event par excellence which disclosed the identity of Jesus as ku,rioj (Rom 1:4).152 In 2 Cor 4:5 where I noted the confession of Jesus Christ as Lord, we also see Paul placing this confession in proximity with the context of the resurrection of Jesus. Paul goes on to assert in 2 Cor 4:14 that eivdo,tej o[ti o` evgei,raj to.n ku,rion VIhsou/n kai. h`ma/j su.n VIhsou/ evgerei/ kai. parasth,sei su.n u`mi/n / “because we know that the one who raised the Lord Jesus will raise us also with Jesus, and will bring us with you into his presence.”153 Here we note a close relationship between the lordship of Jesus and his resurrection. Plummer notes that: “To ‘preach Christ as Lord’ is to preach Him as crucified, risen, and glorified.”154 As in Rom 10:9 Paul also states here in 2 Cor 4:14 that it is God who raised Jesus from the dead.155 In 1 Cor 12:3 where the confession “Jesus is Lord” also appears, there is no explicit link with the resurrection of Jesus.156 In Phil 2:11 where the confession (“Jesus Christ is Lord”) also appears, it is set within the context of the exaltation of Jesus by God.157 This universal acclamation follows on the heels of the exaltation state of Jesus. The relation between the confession “Jesus Christ is Lord” and the exaltation of Jesus appears to be explicit in Phil 2:9–11. In Phil 2:9–11, Paul uses exaltation language while in Rom 10:9 he uses the language of resurrection. Both these terms (resurrection and exaltation) overlap with each other in Paul.158 Fee notes that there is a parallel between Rom 10:9 and Phil 2:11 in terms of Jesus’ lordship and resurrection when he states: “that same combination is undoubtedly in view here [Phil 2:9–11].”159 Both of these texts share common points in comparison. They both associate the confession “Jesus is Lord” with his exaltation / resurrection. I will provide a fuller treatment of Phil 2:9–11 in chapter 6. In Rom 10:10, Paul asserts that one believes (that God raised Jesus from the dead) with the heart and is justified, and makes confession (“Jesus is Lord”) with the mouth and is saved. Moo notes that “[b]elief in the heart is clearly the

PRACTICAL EXPRESSIONS OF WORSHIP IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

| 163

crucial requirement . . . Confession is the outer manifestation of this critical inner response.”160 The order is that of faith first in the heart, and then confession with the mouth.161 The movement seems to go from the inside (heart), to the outside in confession (mouth). Here I recall the comments on 2 Tim 2:22 above which emphasizes that one who calls on the Lord must do so from a “pure heart.”162 This is borne out in Rom 10:10 where Paul actually reverses the order found in Rom 10:9 (confession with mouth first, and then believing with the heart second) so that belief precedes confession. Salvation here is both christological and theological, for it entails the confession of Jesus as Lord and believing in his resurrection by God.163 In Rom 10:11, Paul cites the OT passage of Isa 28:16,164 which is directly related to YHWH or the ku,rioj in the LXX. Paul takes this YHWH passage as a reference to Jesus.165 In citing the ending of Isa 28:16, Paul intends to argue that whoever puts their trust in Jesus would not be ashamed.166 The element of trust should be noted here which is a necessary ingredient in a relationship. Here Paul implies that believers are to be in a trusting relationship with the risen Jesus, which denotes the dependence of the believer on the risen Lord. Paul’s reference to shame is an important one from a social-cultural perspective.167 In the social-cultural world of Paul, shame and honor were the standards of ethics and status.168 Paul assures both Jews and Gentiles that to trust in the risen Jesus will not bring shame or dismay to them but will rather save them. In Rom 10:12 Paul remarks that there is no distinction in the Christian community between Jews and Gentiles since their Lord is equally Lord of both, and the equality and commonality between Jews and Gentiles are derived from the same Lord who is over them. This Lord or ku,rioj here again is the risen Jesus.169 An important designation that Paul makes of the risen Jesus in Rom 10:12 is that he is ku,rioj pa,ntwn / “Lord of all.” This title evokes the language of deity as we see in the Greek writer Pindar who asserts concerning Zeus that he is Zeu.j o` pa,ntwn ku,rioj / “Zeus the lord of all.”170 This expression is also used of YHWH in the OT.171 Fitzmyer also notes that this phrase “Lord of all” is a Jewish formula used of YHWH in the Dead Sea Scrolls.172 It seems here that Paul is applying to the risen Jesus a divine YHWH title to establish a note of sovereignty by the risen Jesus over the faith community. Moreover, in calling the risen Jesus “Lord of all,” Paul is showing that the risen Jesus is the master or lord of all believers composed of both Jews and Gentiles, and therefore he stands in relation to believers as a master who is over his slaves or servants. As “Lord” he is their master (Rom 14:4; Col 4:1),173 and they by contrast are his servants or slaves. This description of the risen Jesus as “Lord of all” does not necessarily necessitate a worship context, but it does present a relationship between a slave-master where all believers who are servants / slaves are in submission to the risen Jesus who is Lord of all.

164

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

Paul states furthermore that the Lord Jesus, ploutw/n eivj pa,ntaj tou.j evpikaloume,nouj auvto,n / “is rich to all who call upon him” (Rom 10:12). It is here in Rom 10:12 that we find the first reference to evpikale,w. As we shall see, in the next two verses (vv. 13–14), the verb evpikale,w will appear twice. Paul thus employs evpikale,w a total of three times in Rom 10:12–14, and it is to be noted that in all three cases it is the risen Jesus, the ku,rioj, who is the referent or object of the verb.174 The title or name ku,rioj is also used a total of three times (Rom 10:9, 12–13), and again in every case it is the risen Jesus who is the referent.175 The frequency of the title ku,rioj and the verb evpikale,w in close syntactical proximity to each other must at least indicate some significance between these two terms. The ku,rioj is the one whom the servant or subject calls upon for aid, protection, and provision. We noted above the early roots of the confession “Jesus is Lord” in the Christian community, and this confession appears to be related to not only the risen Jesus (Rom 1:3–4; 10:9; Phil 2:9–11), but as noted, it was uttered in the worship gatherings of the Christian community and quite possibly in the Christian rite of baptism.176 Closely associated with this confession is the invocation of this same Lord by his followers. Paul states in Rom 10:12 that the Lord Jesus is rich or generous to all who invoke or call upon him. The reference here by Paul to the Lord Jesus being rich is interesting in light of other Pauline passages. In 2 Cor 8:9 Paul speaks of Jesus being rich, but in becoming human, he became poor so that believers might become rich to God through him.177 Earlier in Rom 2:4, Paul rhetorically questions the person who takes “the riches of [God’s] kindness” for granted. Moreover, in Rom 11:33 in the doxology surveyed above,178 Paul speaks of the depth of the riches of God. In speaking of the riches and generosity of the risen Jesus in respect to believers, Paul is employing an attribute usually given to God.179 Hauck and Kasch note that Paul usually applies this term to God, Jesus, and the faith community,180 and that for Paul, “[r]iches is for him a term to denote the being of Christ, the work of God in Christ, and the eschatological situation of Christ’s community.” 181 One who is rich and generous has resources. Louw and Nida define the term Paul uses of the risen Jesus, ploute,w, as “to have considerably more than what would be regarded as the norm in a society—‘to be rich, to be wealthy, well-to do.’”182 Sanday and Headlam define the term as “abounding in spiritual wealth.”183 Paul uses this language to show that the risen Jesus has abundant spiritual resources as the Lord of his servants to bless them and provide for them. Conversely, the servants in their relationship with the risen Lord are dependent on him for such resources since he is the source of such resources. Here I note again the contrast between the servant / minor and the master / major. Since the risen Jesus has such plentiful resources, he is to be honored and acknowledged by his servants. Rom 10:12 also implies that the risen Jesus can hear the invocation of his servants and

PRACTICAL EXPRESSIONS OF WORSHIP IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

| 165

that he can respond to them, no matter where they are.184 Paul already made this point in 1 Cor 1:2 when he referred to believers as invoking or calling on the name of the Lord Jesus in every place. The idea that the risen Jesus can hear the invocation of Christian believers in every place appears to be a divine attribute possessed by God.185 This act of invocation to the risen Jesus is an act Paul attributes to both Jews and Gentiles,186 which implies a communal corporate action and one which implies an equality between Jews and Gentiles (cf. Gal 3:28). In Rom 10:13, Paul cites an OT YHWH passage (Joel 2:32) wherein he identifies the risen Jesus with YHWH.187 In Rom 10:13, syntactically Jesus the ku,rioj becomes the object of the invocation.188 Bauckham comments on Paul’s application of Joel 2:32 to Jesus in Rom 10:13, “It is the climax of a clear statement of christological monotheism, which makes a very serious identification of Jesus with YHWH.”189 If the risen Jesus is identified by Paul as the ku,rioj / YHWH of Joel 2:32, then this further strengthens the position that the act of invocation to Jesus as the Lord is a religious practice. Also, the relational aspect between the subject who exercises the level of action of invoking the object, who is the risen Lord, is according to my proposed criteria suggestive of a worship context. This leads us to affirm that Paul did see the risen Jesus as an object of invocation in a religious context which has been established by his citation of Joel 2:32, and therefore we do have worship. The association of the act of invocation with worship is seen in the borrowing of invocation language from the OT where YHWH is the referent, and the transfer of such language by Paul to the risen Jesus. In the act of invocation, the object who is called upon is also being acknowledged, and therefore honored as the source of help, and the referent who can respond to petitions of the faith community. Fitzmyer agrees when he notes regarding Rom 10:12–13 that “[v]erses 12–13 thus become an eloquent witness to the early church’s worship of Christ as Kyrios.”190 Paul finally makes an important statement in Rom 10:14,191 Pw/j ou=n evpikale,swntai eivj o]n ouvk evpi,steusan pw/j de. pisteu,swsin ou- ouvk h;kousan pw/j de. avkou,swsin cwri.j khru,ssontoj / “How then shall they call upon him in whom they have not believed? And how can they believe in him of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching?”192

In this section, Paul raises a number of questions which are intended to be rhetorical,193 and directed at Israel.194 In particular, I wish to focus for the purposes of this study only on Rom 10:14a. In order to call or invoke Jesus, one must first believe in him. In Rom 10:14a, Paul asks the question (after he has just cited Joel 2:32 in Rom 10:13 where the ku,rioj who is invoked is Jesus), Pw/j ou=n evpikale,swntai eivj o]n ouvk evpi,steusan / “How then shall they call upon him in whom they have not believed?” The nearest antecedent to the relative pronoun

166

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

o]n in Rom 10:14 is the ku,rioj of Rom 10:13 who, as already noted, is the risen Jesus.195 Belief must precede invocation, for one must know first who it is he or she is calling upon.196 This was the point Paul made earlier in Rom 10:9–10. Belief begins in the heart, and confession is made with the mouth (10:10), the confession is “Jesus is Lord” (10:9), but then the invocation must also be oral since it entails calling on the name of the Lord who is Jesus, and who is identified with YHWH (Rom 10:13).197 In Rom 10:14, Paul reinforces the element of invocation already introduced in 10:13. Paul presents the risen Lord as the one who has to be called upon or invoked in order for one to receive salvation. I see here again elements of my criteria for worship. The risen Jesus is the object of invocation, believers or subjects are relationally dependent on him for salvation; in order to realize such salvation, they must exercise a level of action in which they call on him or invoke him. The practice of invocation as we have seen is one which appears both in Hellenistic and biblical texts where the context is clearly religious. Due to the religious nature of invocation according to my criteria, we have a context of worship in the case of the risen Jesus. What further strengthens the religious nature of invocation in the case of the risen Jesus as we have seen is Paul’s identification of the risen Jesus with YHWH in Rom 10:13 (cf. Joel 2:32). We have here as noted above an important element within Christian worship. We have seen that Paul introduces the risen Jesus as an object of worship in the Christian faith community by way of an aspect of worship, namely, that of invocation. As our earliest NT writer, Paul is the first to introduce the risen Jesus into Christian worship. I wish to also consider the passage in the Pastoral letter of 2 Tim 2:22, which also contains the verb evpikale,w.

5.1.3. 2 Timothy 2:22 ta.j de. newterika.j evpiqumi,aj feu/ge di,wke de. dikaiosu,nhn pi,stin avga,phn eivrh,nhn meta. tw/n evpikaloume,nwn to.n ku,rion evk kaqara/j kardi,aj / “So flee youthful passions, pursue righteousness, faith, love, peace with the those calling upon the Lord from a pure heart.”

Paul exhorts Timothy to shun youthful passions, and that he should pursue honorable virtues such as righteousness, faith, love, and peace. He commands that he should do this not only on his own but with (meta.) those who call on the Lord from a pure heart. In this text there are a series of ethical elements such as righteousness, faith, love, and peace. This indicates that there is a link between these ethical elements and calling on the Lord from a pure heart. In Ps 24:3–4, the one who is said to be qualified to ascend the hill of YHWH and stand in his holy place is the one who has clean hands and a pure heart. The clean hands appear to

PRACTICAL EXPRESSIONS OF WORSHIP IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

| 167

refer to one’s actions and the pure heart to one’s thought life and motives.198 The underlying theme is that one who approaches God must do so in the context of purity. This indicates that one’s presentation before God must be pure in order for worship to be accepted. Here I note in 2 Tim 2:22 that just as in 1 Cor 1:2 where Paul states that the invocation of the risen Jesus is a communal act within the worshipping community, so here Paul also notes that Timothy should pursue the listed virtues with other believers who also call on the Lord, and hence he also emphasizes the communal aspect. When the preposition meta, is used with the genitive as it is here, it denotes association, accompaniment, “with,” “in company with” and in spatial terms it denotes being “with” or “among”199 others, in this case the worshipping community. I wish to focus primarily on the phrase, meta. tw/n evpikaloume,nwn to.n ku,rion evk kaqara/j kardi,aj / “with the those calling upon the Lord from a pure heart.” The to.n ku,rion / “the Lord” here in keeping with traditional Pauline linguistic parlance is a reference to the risen Jesus.200 The word for invocation (evpikale,w) is also used with the risen Lord Jesus as its referent.201 The reference to invocation in 2 Tim 2:22 is recognized as also alluding to Joel 2:32 (LXX Joel 3:5).202 Earlier in 2 Tim 2:19, Paul after denouncing the false teachers in the faith community wrote by contrast in support of the faithful believers, o` me,ntoi stereo.j qeme,lioj tou/ qeou/ e[sthken e;cwn th.n sfragi/da tau,thn\ :Egnw ku,rioj tou.j o;ntaj auvtou/ kai, VAposth,tw avpo. avdiki,aj pa/j o` ovnoma,zwn to. o;noma kuri,ou / “But God’s firm foundation stands, bearing this seal: ‘The Lord knows those who are his,’ and, ‘Let every one who names the name of the Lord depart from iniquity’” (RSV).203 Paul cites two passages from the LXX, the first dealing with God’s foundation (Isa 28:16),204 and the second dealing with the Lord’s knowledge of those who are his (Num 16:5).205 Paul speaks of both “God’s firm foundation” and “the Lord” who knows those who are his.206 Here we see both “God” and “Lord” being used together, which also is typical of Paul (e.g., 1 Cor 8:6). What is particularly interesting here is that Paul altered the reading in the LXX and conformed it to the reading of the MT. The following comparison will demonstrate this with a comparative reading of Num 16:5 in the LXX and MT and 2 Tim 2:19: Num 16:5 (LXX): e;gnw o` qeo.j tou.j o;ntaj auvtou/ / “God knows those who are his.” Num 16:5 (MT): Al-rv,a]-ta,

hw"hy> [d:yOw> / “the Lord will make known who is his.”

2 Tim 2:19: :Egnw ku,rioj tou.j o;ntaj auvtou/ / “The Lord knows those who are his.”

What is immediately striking here is that Paul follows the LXX reading except when it comes to the use of the divine title. Rather than following the LXX reading (which Paul usually did) which uses o` qeo.j, Paul seems to have followed the MT

168

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

instead which contains the divine name hw"hy> and which is carried over into Greek as ku,rioj. We encounter here another example of a YHWH text being applied to Jesus,207 a common Pauline stylistic feature as has already been noted above (Rom 10:13; cf. Joel 2:32; Phil 2:11; cf. Isa 45:23). The idea of the Lord knowing those who are his indicates a sense of belongingness which is usually applied in the Pauline literature to believers in relation to the risen Jesus.208 This also implies a relationship between two parties, in this case, the Lord and his own people whom he knows. Knowing someone is necessary to forge a relationship. The fact that Paul identifies the risen Lord Jesus in an OT text where YHWH is the referent seems to ground this relationship in a worship context. The notion of the Lord knowing his people does not explicitly denote worship, but it does imply a relationship. What strengthens the idea that worship is implied is the wider context in 2 Tim 2:22 which contains a reference of invocation to the risen Jesus. This would imply that those whom the Lord knows are the ones who invoke him. The next phrase in 2 Tim 2:19 in particular is interesting: VAposth,tw avpo. avdiki,aj pa/j o` ovnoma,zwn to. o;noma kuri,ou / “Let every one who names the name of the Lord depart from iniquity.”209 In this case, the name of the Lord must necessarily be Jesus.210 Both quotations in 2 Tim 2:19 regarding “the Lord” thus have the risen Jesus in mind. The verb ovnoma,zw means not only “to name” but also “to call by name.”211 Louw and Nida define it as “to utter a name in a ritual context . . . ‘to pronounce a name, to call out a name.’”212 Louw and Nida’s comments are important here. They refer to the idea of calling out a name in “a ritual context.” The nature of a ritual context places a level of action such as calling out a name within a worship setting. This notion is further buttressed by the pertinent comments also made by Louw and Nida that ovnoma,zw is “an idiom, literally ‘to name the name of the Lord’) to employ the name of the Lord as evidence that one worships the Lord—‘to say that one belongs to the Lord’ or ‘to declare that one is a worshipper of the Lord.’”213 Here Louw and Nida recognize that this idiom or expression clearly denotes worship. However, Louw and Nida do not explain why this idiom denotes worship. I suggest according to my criteria that the reason why the idiom of naming the name of the Lord suggests worship is that it expresses a level of action in a religious context by the subject or worshipper when he or she calls or invokes the Lord, the object of the invocation, for help or aid. It is the personal relational religious act of invocation between the worshipper and the Lord which grounds the action itself in a worship context. That this word ovnoma,zw is expressive of worship either of God or other gods is also attested in the LXX.214 We note here the peculiarity of the referent of this idiom or expression of worship being the risen Jesus, a point I have already maintained was already established with Paul. What we encounter in the Pastoral passage of 2 Tim 2:22 (cf. 2:19) is consistent with what we have examined in the earlier Pauline letters in the area of invocation (Rom

PRACTICAL EXPRESSIONS OF WORSHIP IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

| 169

10:9–14; 1  Cor 1:2). The practical expression of invocation also brings out the aspect of dependence and acknowledgment in worship. To call on the Lord is to show dependence on him and also to acknowledge him as the one who can answer. To summarize, when Paul employs the verb evpikale,w, he has the risen Jesus as the object, and only the risen Jesus (Rom 10:9–14; 1 Cor 1:2). The one exception is 2 Cor 1:23 where God is the object of the invocation, but as noted the context is not one of worship, but of an oath taking where Paul calls or invokes God as his witness to the veracity of his statements. We have seen that the verb evpikale,w is used both in the Greco-Roman sources and in the biblical texts to denote or express worship wherein the worshipper calls upon the name, or invokes the name of a god, gods, or God. I noted the appearance of the verb evpikale,w in the LXX in texts related to worship where the referent is YHWH. In the Pauline letters, we have seen that Paul is cognizant of the LXX’s use of evpikale,w, and in Rom 10:13 he explicitly cites Joel 2:32 (Joel 3:5; MT) but applies this text to the risen Jesus. In 1 Cor 1:2, Paul uses similar language where Christian believers are described as those who call on the name of the Lord Jesus or invoke him in every place. It was also noted that this Pauline emphasis on the invocation of the risen Jesus is carried over into the Pastoral Letters, particularly in 2 Tim 2:22 (cf. 2:19). I also noted albeit briefly, that that the language of invocation is also used to express the act of prayer. Longenecker lists evpikale,w among the Pauline words used for prayer.215 If invocation denotes an act of prayer (both of which are expressions of worship), then calling upon the name of YHWH = praying to YHWH, as in the case of Joel 2:32. Since Paul cites Joel 2:32 in Rom 10:13 in reference to the risen Jesus, then it would be logical to equally conclude that calling upon the Lord Jesus = praying to the Lord Jesus. This equivalence between invocation and prayer to Jesus has been noted by several scholars.216 This also indicates that Paul not only saw Christian believers as being in relationship to God, but he also saw Christian believers as being in relationship to the risen Jesus. In this respect, Paul appears to have, to borrow Hurtado’s words, a binitarian view of worship where both God and the risen Lord Jesus become the objects of Christian devotion (cf. 1 Cor 8:6). Paul does not employ the words defined as “worship” (latreu,w, latrei,a, seba,zomai, and proskune,w )217 to Jesus, but in the case of expressions and acts of worship, he does so in the area of invocation.

5.2. Prayer David Stanley notes that “[p]rayer in Saint Paul is a topic which, surprisingly enough, has not in recent years received the attention its significance in his own life would appear to warrant from those professionally engaged in Pauline

170

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

studies.”218 According to W. B. Hunter, the “academic study of Pauline prayer material continues to be truncated”219 and overall, “scholarly interest in NT prayer material has bee relatively slight.”220 Oscar Cullmann provides a comprehensive treatment of prayer but from the broad perspective of the whole NT.221 The study of prayer in the Pauline literature is one which has been underestimated in scholarship and not given due attention. Research on Pauline prayer material has been undertaken and surveyed by R. Gebauer,222 G. Harder,223 and helpful studies have been contributed by Peter T. O’Brien,224 and G. P. Wiles.225 There is a need to probe this topic further as well within the wider context of worship in Paul. BDAG defines proseuch,, which is one of the terms used by Paul for prayer, as a “petition addressed to deity, prayer.”226 Louw and Nida define proseuch, as “to speak to or to make requests of God—‘to pray, to speak to God, to ask God for, prayer.’”227 While prayer involves addressing God (Sir 50:19), it also assumes that God can hear prayer and respond to it. In Greek literature prayer was generally directed to the gods.228 Xenophon used proseu,comai to refer to prayers offered to the gods.229 Plato uses proseu,comai to refer to prayer offered to the sun.230 Josephus uses proseu,comai to refer to prayer made to God,231 and other gods.232 Fee notes that proseuch, is “the standard biblical word for ‘prayer’—of any and all kinds.”233 Fee may be overstating this point because as we shall see below Paul actually uses a series of words other than proseuch, to convey the idea of communication with God, and all these words can also be called “prayer.” Thus, contrary to Fee, proseuch, cannot include “any and all kinds” of prayer. J. B. Lightfoot characterized the word proseuch, as “the general offering up of the wishes and desires to God.”234 The context in which prayer(s) appears is a religious one, and the object is usually a divine one. In this case, prayer becomes the level of action performed by a human subject or a faith community, and according to my proposed criteria prayer this appears in a worship context. The link between prayer in Paul’s letters and worship is so close that a number of scholars are of the conviction that much of Paul’s prayer language has links with “the liturgical formulations of early Christian worship.”235 The act of prayer denotes primarily the idea of communication, and the object of this communication at least in the biblical texts is God.236 Louw and Nida note that “[t]he most generic expression for prayer may simply be ‘to speak to God.’”237 Bruce Malina from a social-cultural perspective defines prayer as a socially meaningful act of communication, bearing directly upon persons perceived as somehow supporting, maintaining, and controlling the order of existence of the one praying, and performed with the purpose of getting results from or in the interaction of communication.238

PRACTICAL EXPRESSIONS OF WORSHIP IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

| 171

While the word proseuch, came to designate the act of speaking or communicating with God, it also came to designate “a place of or for prayer.”239 Paul always uses this word in terms of communicating with God and never as a place of prayer. Paul sees the Christian assembly as the temple of God itself (1 Cor 3:16–17; 2 Cor 6:16–18; Eph 2:21–22).240 For Paul, the worship practices of his faith communities were not restricted to any particular place, but could be practiced anywhere.241 According to Jerome Neyrey all other practices of worship in the faith community are subsumed under the primary and essential practice of prayer. Neyrey comments: Worship, we learned, is foremost communication: from mortals to God (prayer) and from God to mortals . . . communication with God comes in the relationship of the Jesus group with the Deity . . . Within the worshipping group, moreover, we find ceremonies [baptism, Eucharist] that confirm identity and membership, as well as role and status.242

Neyrey makes a number of important observations here. Prayer underlines the clearest relational aspect in worship due to its communicative nature. Here we note again the subject-object relationship, which is definitive in any relationship. Since a relationship is a two-way correspondence, communication is a necessary component of the relational aspect between the worshipper and God; prayer is the communicative medium whereby the worshipper addresses God. God in turn responds to the petitions, requests, and needs of the worshipper. The paradigm of servant-master and child-parent expresses the relationship between the worshipper and God. It also expresses simultaneously the varying contrast between the worshipper and God in prayer. The servant / child is always in a state of submission and dependence to the master / parent. One of the expressions of submission or surrender sometimes associated with prayer is the raising of the hands.243 While Paul says nothing in his letters about standing while at prayer, the gospels do attest this practice (Matt 6:5; Mark 11:25). There is an anti-Christian graffito from probably the early third century CE from the Palatine hill in Rome of a man named Alexamenos before what appears to be a figure of a crucified man with the head of a donkey. This crucified figure is believed to be a caricature of Jesus. The inscription in Greek reads: ’Alexa,menoj se,bete qeo,n / “Alexamenos worships his god” or “Alexamenos worships god.”244 In this picture, the figure of Alexamenos according to the inscription is engaged in an act of worship. What is noticeable is that he has one of his hands raised while he faces the crucified figure. This would indicate that a practical expression of surrender or submission and dependence is being communicated by the raised hand and that it is associated with worship. Here we see an association of the

172

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

raising of the hand with worship. It functions as a visible expression of one’s act of worship. Alexamenos appears to be standing which as noted is also a posture associated with prayer. This picture also illustrates that Christians offered worship to Jesus,245 a point I will also address later. Bauckham notes that this picture “depicts a man in prayer”246 and Michel notes that this is a picture of a “slave worshipping.”247 What is also of interest is the Greek word used for worship in this inscription: CEBETE (se,bete). It appears to come from the word se,bomai, which also carries the meaning “to worship.”248 Louw and Nida note that this word is related to the word seba,zomai, which as we saw above Paul uses in Rom 1:25,249 and which functions as a very strong word for worship denoting awe and reverence as detailed in Table 2.250 The means whereby God communicates back to the worshipping community, according to Neyrey, is principally by an audible medium such as hearing the Scriptures, the reciting of the Jesus story, and the utterance of oracles or prophecies. Elements of these can be found in Paul in his citation of Scripture (e.g., Rom 10:13), allusions to the Jesus story (e.g., 1 Cor 11:23–25), and prophecies (1 Cor 14). Communication with God is associated with the “Jesus group,” a concept Paul would have understood as those who are “in Christ.” All of these actions Neyrey notes come under the hubris of worship. In this respect, worship cannot be merely reduced to just being primarily verbal as Aune argues,251 but it is more than that; it is audible as Neyrey shows above but also practical in its expressions, some of which are substantively expressed in baptism and the Eucharist. There is thus a co-relation between the verbal and the audible components in worship, for what is spoken is expected to be heard. Hearing the preaching of the word of Christ was essential for the stimulation of faith in one’s heart (Rom 10:17), and the prophecies delivered in the faith community were also received audibly for the purposes of communal edification (1 Cor 14:1–5). While all of these assume a relational aspect between the worshipper and God, prayer according to Neyrey appears to be the primary conduit because of its communicative nature. This may explain why for Paul he employed the vocabulary of prayer more so in his letters than all of the other texts of the NT. Hunter argues that “the Pauline prayer vocabulary is the richest in the NT, and the apostle uses prayer terms more frequently than any other writer.”252 Hunter also points out that prayer was an important element in Pharisaic Judaism and given Paul’s selfadmitted ties to Pharisaic Judaism (Phil 3:5), it can probably be assumed that prayer was central to Paul’s religious outlook, life, and religious practice.253 Leon Morris comments regarding Paul and prayer that: “Clearly Paul is more than a little interested in prayer.”254 We gather from Paul’s letters that the act of prayer was important to him. Paul frequently prayed for his faith communities as he remembered them (Rom 1:9–10;

PRACTICAL EXPRESSIONS OF WORSHIP IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

| 173

2 Cor 13:7, 9; Eph 1:16; Col 1:3, 9; Phil 1:4, 9; 1 Thess 1:2; 3:10; 2 Thess 1:11; 2 Tim 1:3; Phlm 4, 6). Paul claimed to pray in tongues (1 Cor 14:14–15), he asked believers to pray for him (Rom 15:30; 2 Cor 1:11; Col 4:3; Phil 1:19; 2 Thess 3:1; Phlm 22),255 and to pray for himself and his associates (1 Thess 5:25), Paul expects Christian believers to pray for one another (2 Cor 9:14), Paul prays for Israel’s salvation (Rom 10:1). Furthermore, Paul exhorts his faith communities to be faithful in prayer (Rom 12:12), he counsels them not to be anxious about anything, but to make their requests known to God in prayer (Phil 4:6; cf. Col 4:2), Christian married couples are advised to devote themselves to prayer so as to not be tempted by Satan (1 Cor 7:5), and finally Paul advises that prayer(s) should be constant and regular when he orders believers to pray always, constantly, or without ceasing (1 Thess 5:17).256 Closely connected to prayer in Paul was the relation it had to the risen Jesus. God is addressed in prayer through and in the risen Jesus (Rom 1:8; 7:25; 16:27; 2 Cor 3:4; cf. 1 Cor 15:57). This shows that for Paul the risen Jesus was closely associated with prayer as the means or agent through whom and in whom God was addressed. The practice of prayer for Paul was an expression of worship to God. The array of words Paul utilizes for prayer like the words we examined above for worship (latreu,w, latrei,a, seba,zomai, proskune,w, douleu,w, qrhskei,a), demonstrates that Paul did not confine himself to any one word for “prayer,” although proseuch, appears to be the most dominant word for “prayer.”257 Neyrey rightly notes that the tendency of scholars in the past was to take the various types of ancient prayers and reduce them to only one type.258 Prayer (like ‘worship’) is multifaceted. This seemed to be a problem with the ancient writers as well when it came to defining prayer under a single category. Philo of Alexandria in his treatment of prayer, while recognizing the multifaceted dimension in prayer, inevitably ends in reducing prayer under the category of “praise.”259 Plato also reduced prayer to “petition.”260 The English word prayer comes from a number of Greek words. Robert Morgenthaler in his study Statistik des Neutestamentlichen Wortschatzes261 lists sixteen various words for “prayer” which occur some 133 times in the entire Pauline corpus.262 These numbers of prayer words and the rate of their occurrence in the Pauline corpus, considerably outnumber the rest of the NT texts.263 Louw and Nida make the important observation concerning the multifaceted nature of the category of prayer: In some languages there are a number of different terms used for prayer depending upon the nature of the content, for example, requests for material blessing, pleas for spiritual help, intercession for others, thanksgiving, and praise. There may also be important distinctions on the basis of urgency and need. The most generic expression for prayer may simply be “to speak to God.” It is normally best to avoid an expression which means primarily “to recite.”264

174

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

Other words utilized by Paul in addition to proseuch, to communicate the act of “prayer,” which will be discussed in the course of this study on prayer, are euvloghto,j (“blessed”); euvloge,w (“to bless”); evxomologe,w (“to praise”); e;painoj (“to praise”); euvcariste,w (“to give thanks”); euvcaristi,a (“thanksgiving”); ca,rij (“thanks”); de,hsij (“entreaty,” “request”); evpikale,w (“to call upon,” “invoke”); parakale,w (“to call to one’s side,” “call upon for help”).265 Neyrey also lists at least ten terms for prayer such as singing a song, singing a psalm, a hymn, a paean, blessing, praising, thanksgiving, confession, confession of sins, and petitionary requests.266 When these words have as their referent a divine object such as God, they are treated as prayer words. These words take on a religious context when used of God as their referent, and hence according the criteria set out in this book we have worship taking place. In addition to these words, Longenecker notes that there are also “non-prayer terms [which] are also used in connection with prayers of petition,”267 among which are mnei,a (“remembrance” or “mention”); sunagwni,zomai (“to assist”); sunupourge,w (“to join in helping”); mnhmoneu,w (“to mention” or “remember”).268 As with the words listed above, these “non-prayer terms” when used in the context of address to God, do take upon themselves imported meaning as prayer terms. Here we see why the religious context is important because it establishes these words within a framework of worship. When these words are applied to humans as their objects, they do not take on a worship connotation because in this case the context is not religious. To ask a human for something is not worship, but to ask God who is a divine object places the request in a religious context and hence worship occurs. As I have argued, in order for worship to be present a religious context must be established. All the various words above imply a communicative relationship which is the essence of prayer: communication with God. The verb “to give thanks” (euvcariste,w)269 is a prominent feature and component in Paul’s prefaces or salutations in his letters.270 This is evident in Rom 1:8; 1 Cor 1:4; 2 Cor 1:11; Eph 1:16; Phil 1:3; Col 1:3, 12; 1 Thess 1:2; 2 Thess 1:3; Phlm 4. While the noun euvcaristi,a is present in the Pastoral Letters (1 Tim 2:1; 4:3–4), the verb euvcariste,w is not attested. O’Brien notes that Paul mentions the subject of “thanksgiving” more often line for line than any other author, whether Hellenistic, pagan, or Christian.271 Paul employs the verb euvcariste,w in reference to Jesus’ ‘words of institution’ at the Last Supper (1  Cor 11:24). Conzelmann argues that the systematic background of euvcariste,w in Paul’s usage lies at its root in Paul’s understanding that euvcariste,w is due to the creator (Rom 1:21).272 A symptomatic sign of rebellion among humans according to Paul in Rom 1:21 is that they do not give thanks (huvcari,sthsan) to God. It should be noted that Paul associates the act of euvcariste,w in the wider context (Rom 1:18–25) with the words seba,zomai and latreu,w in Rom 1:25, two words used for worship as we saw

PRACTICAL EXPRESSIONS OF WORSHIP IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

| 175

above. In this respect, Paul brings the idea of thanksgiving or giving thanks into the context of worship. Paul also mentions the act of thanksgiving (euvcaristi,a / euvcariste,w) in the worship setting of the faith community, particularly in the context of prayer (1 Cor 14:15–18).273 When thanks is rendered to God, he is acknowledged and honored as the source and creator of all things. Neyrey argues that the verb euvcariste,w was originally synonymous with “praise” in the ancient world, and people returned favors by giving “praise” not so much “thanks.”274 Neyrey further notes that the proper cultural context for interpreting euvcariste,w is “‘praise,’ ‘honor,’ and ‘glory.’”275 O’Brien agrees: “It is clear that Pauline thanksgiving approximates to what we normally understand by ‘praise.’”276 The findings of Neyrey and O’Brien indicate that words such as euvcaristi,a and euvcariste,w do carry a synonymous element with other words such as “praise.” Neyrey notes that in the Jewish praise of God it was typical of “piling up synonyms.”277 At the same time, they also tend to overlap with other words used for communication with and acknowledging God as we shall see below in Phil 4:6.278 An example of this can be seen in the word euvloghto,j, which Paul uses and which can carry both the meaning of “to praise”279 and “to bless”280 with God as the direct object (Rom 1:25; 2 Cor 1:3; 11:31; cf. Eph 1:3; 1 Pet 1:3; Sir 50:22).281 That the word euvloghto,j is related to the category of prayer or communication with God is admitted by Louw and Nida, who maintain that “[i]n a number of languages the closest equivalent of [euvloghto,j] ‘to bless’ is ‘to pray God on behalf of’ or ‘to ask God to do something good for.’”282 Neyrey and Jeremias note that both euvloghto,j and euvcariste,w function as synonyms.283 This seems to indicate that while there is no specific one word for “prayer” in Paul’s vocabulary, there were a series of words employed by Paul that contained particular nuances as to their meaning which enhanced and broadened the scope of communication with God. While these words had their own particular meaning, they also had the ability to overlap with each other to form a comprehensive understanding of what communication with God involved. With these above considerations in mind regarding the multifaceted meanings of the word prayer, I define the word prayer as any form of address to God by a human or heavenly entity.284 The human or heavenly entity always remains the subject who offers or directs the prayer to God, and God always remains the object who receives the prayer from the subject. The forms of address may vary, but they are all essentially communication modes where God is always the object or addressee. This raises the question: is all prayer worship? The word prayer like the word worship carries different aspects. It can involve requesting God for material provisions, pleading for help whether material or spiritual, giving thanks, asking God to help or do something for a third party, giving praise, or to request healing. The OT Psalter provides an example of the various aspects of prayer. Within the Psalter one

176

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

encounters psalms of praise, lament, petitions for the king, and thanksgiving.285 To this list can be added the so-called “imprecatory” psalms which contain appeals to God to pour out his wrath and judgment on one’s enemies.286 In all of these cases, God remains the intended object of all these acts of communication. The basic meaning of prayer is communication with God which seems to be generally agreed upon by scholars. God is the source to whom prayer in general is addressed, and in the act of prayer God is being acknowledged as provider, savior, judge, helper, and protector among other things. Prayer thus functions as a vehicle or medium, a practical expression where communication with God takes place. In this respect, we can say that prayer is associated with worship in that God as the direct object of prayer is recognized and acknowledged. Prayer thus functions as a subset of worship. Prayer also functions as an underlying element within worship in that it is the communicative vehicle whereby God is acknowledged and honored. It also implies a dependence on God since prayer assumes that God has the power or authority to provide and answer what is requested of him. Prayer can be direct and indirect in its application. It can be direct when one speaks to God in the second person, or it can be indirect where one can refer to God in the third person and ask, for instance, that God bless someone. In the Pauline letters, as we shall see below, we encounter references to indirect forms of prayer. In the social-cultural Jewish world of Paul, according to Gordon Wiles it was prohibited to include any prayers directly addressed to God in letters, but this may be a hasty generalization on the part of Wiles.287 In the Pauline letters, there are no examples of direct prayer to God by the worshipper in the second person.288 Hunter concurs when he states: “Directly addressing God while writing to others was ruled out by the convention of ancient letter writing. What we find in Paul’s letters are references, allusions and reports about his prayers.”289 One of the reasons for this approach to prayers by Paul in his letters is noted by Longenecker who points out that in the Pauline letters we are not dealing with liturgical texts (which refer to God in the second person)290 but with letters written to the faith communities with reports about prayer.291 While Paul addresses the reader(s), references to God or another third party (such as Christ) naturally occur in the third person.292 Paul never employs the second person pronoun in prayer language in address to God, and as we shall see, not even to the risen Jesus. God is predominantly the focal point of Paul’s prayers (although not exclusively as we shall see) and this seems to be consistent and normative throughout Paul’s writings. Prayer then is essentially a communicative act which functions as the level of action between the worshipper and the worshipped, i.e., God. Prayer involves an address to God. God is believed to respond by way of expressed prophecies, scriptural reading and homilies, and answered prayer(s).293 God remains supreme in prayer and the very act of prayer implies that the

PRACTICAL EXPRESSIONS OF WORSHIP IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

| 177

worshipper is dependent on God to respond to and provide for the needs of the worshipper. The communicative act of prayer presumes that such an action is taken in a metaphorical application in that the worshipper who prays acts as if God were in fact visibly and / or symbolically present before him or her as a human magistrate or human monarch would be, and who would in turn is attentive and responsive to their requests. The practice of prayer thus implies presence of God. In prayer the worshipper both acknowledges and renders honor to God which is a central ingredient of worship. Neyrey notes that in the ancient world of the NT, “[a] person acquires honor in two basic ways: ascription by another or achievement by the claimant.”294 Part of the function of prayer is to ascribe honor to God usually by attributing noble virtues as we saw above in the doxology of Rom 11:33–36.295 The achievement of the claimant (in this case, God) is also another means by which honor is acquired. Because God has achieved certain things, such as providing salvation through Christ (Rom 6:17–18), or providing victory (1 Cor 15:57; 2 Cor 2:14), or providing comfort (2 Cor 1:3–4), or blessing believers in Christ with spiritual blessings (Eph 1:3), he is equally to be honored for achieving such things.296 The ascription of honor from the perspective of the worshipper adds nothing to God in the sense that he is in need of anything. It is a mere acknowledgment of who God is, since nothing can be added to God’s stature because he lacks nothing.297 Neyrey correctly notes that “[m]ortals give God nothing which God lacks; rather they acknowledge the deity’s claims.”298 Greeven argues that there is no reference in ‘the proto-Pauline letters’ to any specific gesture of prayer.299 This may be somewhat over stated on Greeven’s part as Paul does make mention of bowing or kneeling with connotations of worship in Rom 11:4 where 1 Kgs 19:18 is cited in reference to bowing the knee to the Canaanite god Baal.300 This level of action denotes surrender and allegiance in a religious context by the human subject(s) since a divine object is involved (Baal) and may imply prayer since the deity would be addressed in such a context. Loh and Nida argue that the bending of the knee is an idiomatic expression which can denote reverence, worship, and even prayer.301 It should also be noted in Phil 2:10, Paul makes reference to the universal bowing of the knee to the exalted Jesus. I will address this more fully below in chapter 6. We can perhaps deduce from this that the infrequency of references to postures in prayer by Paul probably shows that he was not so much interested in any particular posture or gesture in prayer as he was with the purpose and intent of prayer, which was communication with God. A number of gestures or postures which are indicative of worship appears in Eph 3:14–15 where Paul states: 14 Tou,tou ca,rin ka,mptw ta. go,nata, mou pro.j to.n pate,ra 15 evx ou- pa/sa patria. evn ouvranoi/j kai. evpi. gh/j ovnoma,zetai / 14“For this reason I bow my knees to the Father, 15 from whom every family in heaven and on earth takes its name.” Paul expresses an act of worship to God the Father by

178

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

the bowing of the knees, a gesture of submission and honor to a higher authority. Peter O’Brien notes that the act of bowing or bending the knee “was an expression denoting great reverence and submission . . . especially marking the humble approach of the worshipper who felt the need so keenly that he could not stand upright before God.”302 While prayer is not explicitly mentioned in this text, a number of translations see prayer as implicit in the text such as the NJB: “This, then, is what I pray, kneeling before the Father” and the NLT, “When I think of all this, I fall to my knees and pray to the Father” and the NEB, “With this in mind, then, I kneel in prayer to the Father.” These translations appear to associate the act of kneeling with prayer perhaps because the following verses indicate that Paul is petitioning God on behalf of the faith community (Eph 3:16–19). The petition or request, however, is made in the third person and resembles a “wish prayer” (which will be examined at length below). We see here again that the English word prayer is attempting to capture the notion of communication with God even though no particular words associated with “prayer” are used in Eph 3:16–19. I noted above that the word proskune,w, which Paul uses in 1 Cor 14:25, also can carry the meaning of bowing or falling on one’s knees. In Eph 3:14–15 Paul is using an expression, ka,mptw ta. go,nata, mou / “I bow my knees,” which is communicated by the word proskune,w. The idea reflected here is that of submission and dependence on God by bowing the knees. In the Pastoral letter of 1  Tim 2:8, another gesture or posture in prayer appears: Bou,lomai ou=n proseu,cesqai tou.j a;ndraj evn panti. to,pw| evpai,rontaj o`si,ouj cei/raj cwri.j ovrgh/j kai. dialogismw/n / “I desire, then, that in every place the men should pray, lifting up holy hands without anger or argument” (NRSV). In this text Paul uses the word proseu,comai and closely associates it with the act of lifting up the hands.303 Barrett comments that “[t]o pray with uplifted hands was the common practice in antiquity (pagan, Jewish, and Christian).”304 The practice of prayer here is not restricted to any one place but is to be practiced in “every place.”305 This reference seems to refer to the places where believers gather for worship, so that Walter Lock has commented that it means: “Wherever you meet for public worship.”306 First Timothy 2:8 makes the qualifying note that the hands should be “holy,” which suggests that one who approaches God should approach him with clean hands and not with defiled hands tainted by evil such as “anger” and “argument.” The background to having the hands cleaned when approaching God seems to be traced to the priestly practice of washing the hands (and also the feet) before entering the tabernacle (Exod 30:19–21). A spiritual meaning is given in 1 Tim 2:8 by linking it with ethical standards. We see a link here between the lifting up of holy hands and ethical elements (“without anger or argument”). We encountered this link between approaching God in purity and ethical living in the treatment of 2 Tim 2:22 above.307 We also see a parallel in 1 Tim 2:8

PRACTICAL EXPRESSIONS OF WORSHIP IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

| 179

with Ps 24:3–4 where one of the qualifications of the worshipper who ascends the hill of YHWH and stands in his holy place is that he not only have a “pure heart,” but that he also have “clean hands.”308 Here we see a necessary qualification for true worship to be offered to God, namely, that of having clean or holy hands. Very little is said among some commentaries on the relation of the lifting of hands associated with prayer to that of dependence and submission to God. Marvin Vincent notes that the practice of lifting hands “accompanied taking an oath, blessing, and prayer”309 and Jeremias states that the lifting of the hands “is used religiously to denote the gesture of prayer.”310 We note that while the lifting of the hands can at times be associated with directly blessing God, it can also be associated with the blessing of the faith community by a human agent through whom God confers his blessings (Lev 9:22; Sir 50:20–21; cf. Luke 24:50). Sirach 50:20–21 depicts two acts or expressions, an active one and a passive one. First is the active expression of the high priest Simon lifting his hands to bless the people, and secondly, the passive expression of the people bowing to receive the blessing. The lifting of the hands thus denotes dependence, surrender, and submission.311 The implied referent to whom this submission is rendered is God. Here we note again that God is the source of prayer who is either directly or indirectly acknowledged as the one who can respond to the petition(s) addressed to him. In this respect various forms of prayer can be said in one way or another to be an expression of total submission to God.312 While I have outlined above the words Paul uses for prayer, we will examine a number of Pauline passages concerning prayer from three perspectives. The first will deal with prayer addressed to God, the second with prayer addressed to the risen Jesus, and thirdly, prayer addressed to both God and the risen Jesus.

5.2.1. Prayers Addressed to God: Romans 1:9–10 9 ma,rtuj ga,r mou, evstin o` qeo,j w-| latreu,w evn tw/| pneu,mati, mou evn tw/| euvaggeli,w| tou/ ui`ou/ auvtou/ w`j avdialei,ptwj mnei,an u`mw/n poiou/mai 10 pa,ntote evpi. tw/n proseucw/n mou deo,menoj ei; pwj h;dh pote. euvodwqh,somai evn tw/| qelh,mati tou/ qeou/ evlqei/n pro.j u`ma/j 9 For God, whom I serve with my spirit by announcing the gospel of his Son, is my witness that without ceasing I remember you 10 always in my prayers asking if somehow now at some time I shall succeed in the will of God to come to you. 313

This passage is part of Paul’s salutation to the Christian faith community in Rome and his thankfulness to God for their widespread faith in the Roman world (cf. Rom 1:7–8). Since this text has already been treated on the subject of worship above,314 we will only concern ourselves with the latter part of the text (Rom

180

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

1:9b-10), w`j avdialei,ptwj mnei,an u`mw/n poiou/mai 10pa,ntote evpi. tw/n proseucw/n mou deo,menoj ei; pwj h;dh pote. euvodwqh,somai evn tw/| qelh,mati tou/ qeou/ evlqei/n pro.j u`ma/j / “that without ceasing I remember you 10 always in my prayers asking if somehow now at some time I shall succeed in the will of God to come to you.” The first thing to be noted is that Paul mentions his prayers (proseucw/n; v. 10 [v. 9; NRSV]) for the Roman Christians in close proximity to his mention of his religious service to God, which I have established is worship itself, o` qeo,j w-| latreu,w / “the God whom I serve.” However, it should be noted that Paul not only uses one term for prayer here (proseuch,), but actually three in total. He also employs the term de,omai, which in the NT means “to ask,” “beg” but also to “pray,”315 and also mnei,a. Longenecker as noted above classifies mnei,a as a “non-prayer” term which is used in connection with prayers of petition.316 What places this term within the category of worship is again its use in a religious context with God as the referent. Romans 1:9–10 has a very strong worship context indicated by the use of the verb latreu,w. Morris notes that when Paul uses this noun (mnei,a) he always uses it of “remembrance in prayer.”317 In this sense, the noun mnei,a appears to be tied in with Paul’s prayer language in Rom 1:9. Paul thus conjoins three words for prayer, proseuch,, de,omai, and mnei,a thus showing the fluidity of these terms for prayer in Paul’s vocabulary. Paul did not hold to any one particular word when he dealt with “prayer.” Paul shows by his mention of his prayers through various words (proseuch,, de,omai, and mnei,a), that these actions are closely associated with latreu,w. This text also demonstrates that prayer was individualistic as well as communal for Paul. Paul could speak of his personal worship of God here as well as his personal prayers to God on behalf of the Roman Christians. In this respect, Paul’s prayers take on an intercessory role where he prays for the Roman Christians. Paul’s use of the adverb avdialei,ptwj / “without ceasing” is indicative of the frequency and fervency with which Paul committed himself to prayer at regular intervals.318 This adverb is only used by Paul in his letters in the context of worship.319 An important element in this text is found in Rom 1:10 where Paul after referring to his prayers for the Roman Christians asserts that he asks by God’s will (tw/| qelh,mati tou/ qeou/)320 that he may succeed in coming to visit them. The mention of God’s will by Paul indicates that he recognized that all prayers and even his requested visit were ultimately subject to the will of God.321 As the servant, Paul is completely dependent on the master whose will is to be respected and honored. As we have seen, Paul closely associates prayer with his religious service (latreu,w) to God. While Paul does not call the act of prayer worship here, he does associate it very closely with worship so that there is an implicit reference to worship, insofar that God is the intended addressee of Paul’s prayers. God is also being acknowledged by the act of prayer that he is the source that can provide answers to the

PRACTICAL EXPRESSIONS OF WORSHIP IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

| 181

petitions and requests made to him. In this respect, God is being honored by way of acknowledgment through prayer. Prayer only functions or occurs in this case, with an implicit acknowledgment of God as the source of provision, assistance, and blessing. Prayer thus functions as a subset of worship in that it acknowledges God, and in so doing renders honor to him.

5.2.2. 2 Timothy 1:3 A similar reading to Rom 1:9–10 appears in the Pastoral letter of 2 Tim 1:3, Ca,rin e;cw tw/| qew/| w-| latreu,w avpo. progo,nwn evn kaqara/| suneidh,sei w`j avdia,leipton e;cw th.n peri. sou/ mnei,an evn tai/j deh,sesi,n mou nukto.j kai. h`me,raj / “I thank God whom I serve with a clear conscience as did my ancestors, as I always without ceasing remember you in my petitions night and day.”322

As with Rom 1:9,323 this text speaks of Paul serving God in the religious service context of latreu,w. It also mentions personal prayers for Timothy whereas in Rom 1:9 the audience Paul prayed for was in the plural (u`mw/n), which was the church in Rome (Rom 1:7). In Rom 1:9–10, there are three words used for prayer (proseuch,, de,omai, and mnei,a), whereas in 2 Tim 1:3 there are two words (de,hsij and mnei,a). However, there is a third word that should be added in 2 Tim 1:3, namely, ca,rij, which according to Louw and Nida is “an expression of thankfulness,”324 and in this case the referent or object of thanks is God who is served or worshipped.325 The word ca,rij is also classified by Longenecker as one of the words utilized by Paul to communicate the act of “prayer.”326 The act of giving thanks to God also constitutes prayer as we have defined prayer above as any form of address to God by a human or heavenly entity. The notion of giving thanks to God also implies that God is the provider and the one who answers the requests of the worshipper. Since the act of thanksgiving or giving thanks to God denotes an address to God, the noun ca,rij can be subsumed under the category of “prayer.” Another similarity is that Rom 1:9 has the adverb avdialei,ptwj whereas 2 Tim 1:3 has the adjective avdia,leiptoj, both intended to communicate the frequency by which prayers are offered. The text of 2 Tim 1:3 is much more emphatic in the frequency of prayers than Rom 1:9 in that it combines the adjective avdia,leiptoj with the merism nukto.j kai. h`me,raj / “night and day.”327 The prayers are not only constant but they are offered night and day to denote emphasis.328 Prayer in this text has to do with remembering Timothy before God, and in this case, prayer would take on an intercessory role where one prays for another. The same idea is seen in Rom 1:9–10 where Paul’s prayer for the church in Rome is also intercessory. Intercession is only one aspect of prayer.

182

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

5.2.3. Philippians 4:6 mhde.n merimna/te avll evn panti. th/| proseuch/| kai. th/| deh,sei meta. euvcaristi,aj ta. aivth,mata u`mw/n gnwrize,sqw pro.j to.n qeo,n / “Do not be anxious about anything, but in everything by prayer and petition with thanksgiving let your requests be made known to God.”

In this text, Paul concludes his letter to the Philippians by issuing a prohibition (“Do not be anxious”) and an imperative (“let your requests be made known to God”). Here Paul commands them in the second person to pray. They are not to worry or be anxious about anything, but rather, they are in everything to commit themselves to four things: prayer, petition or supplication, requests, and thanksgiving. These four series of words in English, especially the last three, give the impression that they are different from the first word: prayer. While I noted that proseuch, is the dominant word for “prayer,” it is not the only word. The words used by Paul here, proseuch,, de,hsij, ai;thma, and euvcaristi,a, can all be used in the context of addressing someone.329 All of these words can be placed under the category of “prayer,” for as Moisés Silva notes in Phil 4:6, “Paul uses four different words in reference to prayer.”330 Some of these words Silva argues can function as virtual synonyms for “prayer,”331 and O’Brien is also in agreement on the synonymous nature of these words.332 The various words Paul employs here to communicate the notion of “prayer” or communication with God may be as Silva argues, Paul’s way of showing “the stylistic richness” of prayer and “the great importance that Paul attaches to the believer’s prayer life.”333 As I noted above in regards to the difficulty in English translations to translate various word as “worship” (e.g., Rom 1:25), we encounter a similar problem in Phil 4:6. Since all of these words are communicative in nature, they can all imply “prayer.”334 The English word prayer like worship, is a broad all-encompassing standard term for communication with God, but as we have seen, Paul was not restricted to using one particular word for “prayer.” God is the object and recipient of prayer, supplication, requests, and thanksgiving in Phil 4:6, and this is clearly indicated by the use of the accusative pro.j to.n qeo,n. O’Brien notes that this prepositional phrase means literally “in the presence of God” and indicates that the prayers and petitions are made by those who are in close relationship with God.335 This recalls and reinforces my comments above that the worshipper expresses actions which are taken in a metaphorical application in that the worshipper exercises these actions as if God were in fact visibly and / or symbolically present before him or her as a human magistrate or human monarch would be. In prayer they would be in the presence of the heavenly monarch. Marvin Vincent notes that the prepositional phrase is “implying intercourse with God as well as the idea of direction.”336 This “intercourse” of course is personal

PRACTICAL EXPRESSIONS OF WORSHIP IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

| 183

and the idea of “direction” denotes relationship as the preposition pro,j with the accusative can denote the meaning of “face to face.”337 Here we see the spatial dimension of nearness to God in the expression of prayer. We also see here the utter dependence of the worshipper on God. They offer their prayers, supplication, and requests with thanksgiving to God because they are completely dependent on him for everything. Here the element of submission and dependence should be noted. In summary, in calling the Philippian Christians to make their prayers, petitions, and requests, with thanksgiving made known to God338 in Phil 4:6, Paul presumes the communicative act between the worshipper and God. The act of communication with God is expressed by the English word prayer. What determines whether a word is being used in the category of prayer is the identity of the addressee to whom the word refers, which is usually a divine object. In Phil 4:6, God is clearly the addressee of the requests made to him. We have in Phil 4:6 the elements necessary according to my criteria for worship. We have the human subjects (the Philippian Christians), we have the divine object (God), and levels of action (proseuch,, de,hsij, ai;thma, and euvcaristi,a), in which the subjects render their appreciation to the divine referent. The divine object, in this case God, renders the context as a religious one, and in a religious context, worship takes place. Paul does not use any of the words for worship which we assessed above in the text of Phil 4:6. What gives Phil 4:6 a worship connotation are the elements necessary for worship, which I have argued are present in this text. Paul, however, does not identify the levels of action (proseuch,, de,hsij, ai;thma, and euvcaristi,a) as worship per se. These words have an implicit reference to worship in that God is the intended object of these words, and these words acknowledge God as the source who can provide for the faith community. With God as the divine and direct object of these words, the context thus becomes charged as a religious one. The application of the various words (proseuch,, de,hsij, ai;thma, and euvcaristi,a) to express the notion of communication to God reinforces the argument above that the meaning of “prayer” like “worship” is multifaceted and cannot be reduced to one word. Like worship, prayer is a comprehensive action which incorporates various aspects of communication such as petition, thanksgiving, supplication, and others to express the address of the worshipper to God. There is a multifaceted range of meaning in prayer as we saw with the various words used by Paul. These various words can express various aspects related to prayer which for Paul is essentially to speak to (proseuch,) God. Paul associates with this act other acts such as giving thanks (euvcaristi,a) to God, pleading or begging for something with a sense of urgency (de,hsij)339 from God, or to request something (ai;thma) of God. The common denominator that these words all share is that God is the intended referent and the source that can provide and respond. God is also

184

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

acknowledged as the one who can grant what is being asked for. The picture that these various words also present is that of total dependence and submission on God, a theme that is an important component in worship.

5.3. Prayers Addressed to the Risen Jesus While we have surveyed above a number of passages where Paul directs prayer to God as well as including himself in the prayers of his faith communities to God, we have argued that these prayers are expressive of worship since they have God as their addressee or direct object in a religious context. I also noted that Paul employed a number of words to denote prayer, and therefore prayer is not a reducible one-word term in the Pauline letters. Notwithstanding the variety of words which Paul employs to denote the act of prayer, what is common in all of them is that the addressee or referent is usually God. However, there are some Pauline passages which seem to indicate that Paul and his communities also prayed to or addressed the risen Jesus. We have observed above how the act of invocation was applied specifically to the risen Jesus in Rom 10:9–14 and 1 Cor 1:2. Longenecker has shown that the act of invocation also comes under the category of “prayer” as it is a form of address to a divine object.340 In the examination below, I will treat two main passages which appear to have the risen Jesus as their referent. We see this both in a communal context (wherein Paul includes himself), and also in an individualistic sense, where Paul reports that he personally addressed the risen Jesus in prayer. The first of these passages to be examined is 1 Cor 16:22, and the second one will be 2 Cor 12:8–10. The study of prayer to the risen Jesus is one which needs to be discovered at a deeper level, because it brings to the surface one of the unique characteristics of Paul and his understanding of worship, namely, the place of the risen Jesus within Christian worship. Paul is the first and earliest NT writer to place the risen Jesus within the framework of early Christian worship.341 The appearance of prayers to the risen Jesus in Paul’s letters immediately indicates an attestation of an early practice in the Christian faith community. Bauckham notes that: “[a]cclamations and prayers addressed to Jesus go back to the earliest times.”342 Cullmann notes that prayer to the risen Jesus: “developed from the Church’s invocation of the Lord in public worship . . . the theological idea of prayer through Christ presupposes that already before this one had prayed to him.”343 If prayer as I have argued is a term found in a religious context and which implies a level of action which is indicative of worship, then we have to ask: if the risen Jesus is placed as an addressee of prayer, does this show that Paul also regarded the risen Jesus to be an object of worship? We have already seen that the

PRACTICAL EXPRESSIONS OF WORSHIP IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

| 185

risen Jesus was an object of invocation in the Pauline communities (Rom 10:9–14; 1 Cor 1:2). I turn now to examine the place of the risen Jesus in the prayers of the early Christian community.

5.3.1. 1 Corinthians 16:22 ei; tij ouv filei/ to.n ku,rion h;tw avna,qema Marana qa / “If anyone does not love the Lord, let him be anathema. Maranatha.” 344 This passage is significant in that it contains a NT hapax legomenon in the Aramaic loan word Marana qa or Mara.n avqa,. Before addressing this peculiar hapax legomenon it is important to address the first clause of this passage. Paul employs and reserves one of the strongest words of condemnation avna,qema345 to those who have “no love for the Lord,” and the “Lord” here is the risen Jesus,346 whose parousia is anticipated, as implied in the last clause, if it is taken to be an imperative. Elsewhere Paul speaks of loving God (Rom 8:28), but only here does he address the issue of loving the Lord Jesus.347 In Paul’s mind, Christian believers are to love not only God, but also the risen Jesus.348 It was noted above that the confession “Jesus is Lord” is closely tied to his resurrection (Rom 10:9; cf. Rom 1:3–4), but also to the universal eschatological acclamation of Jesus as “Lord” over all things (Phil 2:11). Thus a hatred for the Lord Jesus may also possibly entail an implied denial of the resurrection of Jesus or of his eschatological lordship. The major subject and polemic of the resurrection of Jesus was just treated previously in 1 Cor 15.349 The phrase filei/350 to.n ku,rion  / “love the Lord” is interesting from the standpoint of the OT.351 Thiselton makes the interesting observation that we may have an echo here from the Shema (Deut 6:4–5).352 LXX Deut 6:5 contains the command kai. avgaph,seij ku,rion to.n qeo,n sou  / “And you shall love the Lord your God.”353 Similarly, Paul speaks of those who do not love the Lord (Jesus) while implying those who love the Lord pray for his parousia, reflected in the Aramaic Marana qa.354 An important point to be made here is that the notion of love itself demands a context of relationship. A sign of religious fidelity by the worshipper is measured by his or her devotion, which is maximally expressed in love to the deity.355 This indicates that believers are also in relationship to the risen Jesus, and they express that relationship first and foremost in their love for him. This also incidentally implies that if they love the Lord Jesus, then he is logically alive as the risen Christ who is also present in the worship assembly of the Christian community (1 Cor 5:4). Witherington comments that: “[h]ad early Christians believed Jesus was simply a deceased Palestinian [Judean] Jewish teacher, this sort of address would never have arisen.”356 Those who “do not love the Lord” most likely are

186

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

those who rejected the risen Jesus as “Lord” and who would have rejected any form of devotion to him.357

5.3.2. The Significance of Maranatha in Christian Worship It is widely acknowledged in scholarship that Mara.na vqa, is a Greek transliteration of an Aramaic word.358 Scholars have posited various translations for maranatha among which are, “Come, O Lord” or “Our Lord, come!”359 or “Our Lord has come.”360 It has also been suggested to be a prophetic future, “Our Lord will come.”361 This is dependent on how the original Aramaic was reconstructed,362 and since Paul transliterated this word into Greek with no spacing in the wording, it is difficult to know with certainty what its Greek equivalent would be.363 The meaning of the Aramaic phrase is complex because it appears somewhat ambiguous.364 Considerable discussion has arisen on the exact meaning of this phrase, from the view that it is passive, “The Lord has come”365 to the view that it is an imperatival vocative “Our Lord come!” Most scholars tend to view it as an imperatival vocative addressed to the risen Lord, who is identified as arem',366 and an invocation at the same time by the Corinthian community for the parousia of the Lord Jesus.367 That the referent in the maranatha prayer is the Lord (arem) Jesus is clarified in the benediction that Paul gives in the following verse in 1 Cor 16:23. Following the maranatha phrase Paul writes: h` ca,rij tou/ kuri,ou VIhsou/ meq u`mw/n / “The grace of the Lord Jesus be with you.” This appears to reinforce that the ku,rioj who is Jesus in 16:23 is the same as the Marana, “our Lord,” in 16:22. The maranatha phrase follows immediately in the same verse (16:22) with Paul’s denunciatory statement ei; tij ouv filei/ to.n ku,rion h;tw avna,qema / “If anyone does not love the Lord, let him be anathema,” where the object under discussion is to.n ku,rion, “the Lord,” who again is Jesus. Thus, in 16:22a and 16:23, Paul places ku,rioj as bookends on either side of the maranatha phrase, and in effect sandwiches the Aramaic phrase in between the two ku,rioj references to the risen Jesus. I take the position shared by the majority of scholars that marantha is best understood as a communal prayer to the risen Jesus. This formula finds its origins in the Judean Aramaic-speaking church, a point that NT scholars now seem to concede without doubt.368 For our purposes, this is very significant in that we can trace a word which would have been used in the worship setting of the Judean Christian community, even prior to Paul.369 Paul himself became acquainted with this word, and it seemed to have gained a liturgical significance even in the Greekspeaking churches like Corinth.370 The enduring nature of this Aramaic word indicates its importance in the early Christian movement, but what makes it particularly significant for our study is that it is an Aramaic word with the risen Jesus as its referent.371 The fact that this word has been retained in its original Aramaic

PRACTICAL EXPRESSIONS OF WORSHIP IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

| 187

setting indicates a solemn use of the word that seems to be traced to the original Christian community itself, which utilized the native tongue or language of Jesus himself.372 This demonstrates that the communal act of addressing the risen Jesus finds its roots in Judean soil most likely prior to Paul.373 David Aune notes as a result that: “[p]erhaps the single most important historical development within the early church was the rise of the cultic worship of the exalted Jesus within the primitive Palestinian [Judean] church.”374 Fee also admits that the appearance of this Aramaic phrase finds it source in the Aramaic-speaking community, and it appears in the context of worship.375 Fee further states that this Aramaic phrase “is to be understood as an early eschatological prayer”376 and “the actual content of the earliest known prayer.”377 Moule sees this as “the earliest known invocation to Christ”378 most probably because of its Aramaic origins, and Hengel asserts as well that this is “the oldest prayer to Jesus in the New Testament.”379 Similarly, Martin notes that maranatha is “the oldest Christian prayer of which we have record”380 and as “a prayer of invocation, [it is] addressed to Jesus.”381 Dunn states that maranatha is “an already well-established invocation, set and retained in Aramaic.”382 The addressee of this “prayer,” as Martin notes, is the risen Lord Jesus himself, and the “prayer-speech” of maranatha “suggests the incipience of a cultus centered upon the living Lord.”383 Martin also asserts: “Thus the contention that the earliest believers invoked the risen Jesus as Lord and awaited his return in glorious power rests on a firm linguistic basis.”384 Cullmann asserts that maranatha is “an expression of the cultic veneration of Christ by the original Aramaic-speaking church.”385 Aune also urges that this may be “a prayer which is intended to effect the cultic presence of the exalted Jesus.”386 Kuhn comments that: “This [primitive Palestinian (Judean) Christian community] confessed Jesus, the exalted Christ, as its Lord. It spoke of Him and prayed to Him as ‘our Lord.’ Here, then, is the origin of the ascription of the name “Lord,” the title ku,rioj, to Jesus.”387 Ben Witherington likewise asserts that the maranatha expression “[a]nd its preservation in Aramaic, transliterated into Greek, attests to its revered place in early Christian devotion to Christ.”388 Alan Segal similarly notes that: “Paul witnesses that the early Christian community directed its prayers to this human figure of divinity along with God (1 Cor 16:22; Rom 10:9–12; 1 Cor 12:3)—all the more striking since Christians, like the Jews, refuse to give any other god or hero any veneration at all.”389 Hurtado comments that maranatha as an “expression obviously derives from the Aramaicspeaking Christians, and is likely a prayer / invocation formula.”390 Thus, the majority of scholars are of the opinion that notwithstanding the exact meaning or translation of maranatha, this phrase or expression is considered to be first and foremost a prayer.391 If this phrase is a prayer, then it logically must follow that it must be directed at someone or an addressee of a divine order, as prayer by its very nature denotes a communicative relationship with a divine being,

188

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

whether God or gods, as surveyed above. It should be noted that the context is a religious one. It is the gathered Christian community which utters this prayer, and therefore, there seems to be good grounds for suggesting worship occurs here. I note here again the proposed criteria for worship. There are the human subjects who are the Corinthian Christians, the divine object is the Lord who is the risen Jesus, and the level of action is the prayer or address of maranatha where a petition or request is made for the Lord to return at the parousia.392 As already noted, several scholars recognize this Aramaic word as a prayer to the risen Jesus. What we are confronted with in this Aramaic word maranatha is evidence that the early Judean Christian community collectively and communally addressed the risen Jesus in prayer in their own native tongue. That this phrase in 1 Cor 16:22 was probably intended as a prayer with the risen Jesus as its referent appears to find further support in what is believed to be its reoccurrence in the Greek form in Rev 22:20, Amh,n e;rcou ku,rie VIhsou/ / “Amen. Come, Lord Jesus!”393 In this passage, the risen Jesus is clearly addressed by the vocative ku,rie, which reinforces the point that this is a direct form of address. Most scholars see Rev 22:20 as a later allusion to the earlier maranatha expression in 1 Cor 16:22. Kuhn argues that the phrase Amh,n e;rcou ku,rie VIhsou/ (Rev 22:20) seems to be a Greek translation of maranatha.394 If this is the case, then the interpretation which sees maranatha as a prayer in the vocative of address is further established. Fee concurs with this in that he argues that the phrase e;rcou ku,rie VIhsou/ in Rev 22:20 “would be nearly the Greek equivalent of the Aramaic Marana tha.”395 The use of the vocative in Rev 22:20 also confirms without question that Jesus is the addressee of this prayer.396 This indicates that the belief in the parousia of Jesus is closely connected with prayer to the risen Jesus as we saw in 1 Cor 16:22. The faith communities of Revelation appear to be in agreement with Paul’s Corinthian community in that both invoke the risen Jesus to return or hasten the parousia. The comparison between Paul (1 Cor 16:22) and the writer of Rev 22:20 in this case shows a progression of the same thought in regards to invoking the risen Jesus to return. Since the parousia appears to be in view here, this may lend support to the idea that what is also being indicated in the maranatha phrase is an eschatological acknowledgment. In this respect, the risen Jesus is not only being addressed as “Lord” by the faith community, but he is also being acknowledged as Lord in an eschatological context. Thus as John Ziesler notes: “Invocation of a future Lord implies the acclamation of a present one . . . For [Paul], Christ is both present and future Lord.”397 The eschatological acknowledgment of YHWH as Lord in the OT was related contextually to the universal worship of God by all the nations (Isa 2:1–4; 45:23; Mic 4:1–3; Zeph 3:9; Zech 14:9). That Paul seems to view an eschatological acknowledgment of Jesus as Lord in a worship context will be further explored in chapter 6 when we examine the Carmen Christi (Phil 2:6–11).

PRACTICAL EXPRESSIONS OF WORSHIP IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

| 189

Some scholars have attempted to dismiss the maranatha phrase as a prayer. Fuller for instance argues that: “the exalted Jesus was never the direct object of worship . . . Christian worship is not Jesus-worship, but the worship of the Father through the Son in the power of the Spirit.”398 Fuller admits that the maranatha phrase was reflective of “the cultus . . . in which the Lord was invoked to come again at the parousia.”399 How Fuller can say in one instance that the “exalted Jesus was never the direct object of worship” and then assert that “the Lord [Jesus] was invoked to come again at the parousia” is puzzling. Who is the direct object of the maranatha prayer in 1 Cor 16:22 if not the “exalted Jesus”? If the Lord Jesus was invoked to return, would this not make him the direct object of the invocation? Fuller does not seem very clear here. The problem with Fuller’s approach appears to be his lack of a proper definition for worship or criteria for worship, which he does not provide. This lack of a proper definition for worship in my opinion results in Fuller’s contradictory statements above. Fuller does not address important Pauline texts such as Rom 10:10–13 and 1 Cor 1:2 where the risen Jesus is invoked by the faith community, nor does he address 2 Cor 12:8–10, a vital text which I will discuss next.400 To invoke and pray are expressions of worship or levels of action, where in a religious context, a divine object or referent is addressed. The maranatha is acknowledged to be a prayer as already noted, and hence in a religious context, it denotes a level of action which expresses an act of worship. The significance of the Aramaic prayer in 1 Cor 16:22 seems to be taken for granted by Fuller and too easily dismissed. To conclude, the maranatha phrase in 1 Cor 16:22 has been recognized as a prayer because it is a communal address by the faith community for the risen and exalted Jesus to return. The passage demonstrates that this is a religious context since it is the collective faith community that together makes this petition or request addressed to the risen Lord Jesus. The parallel of 1 Cor 16:22 with Rev 22:20 seems to lend support that marantha is intended to be a vocative of address to the risen Jesus to hasten the parousia, and thus places it within an eschatological context. The use of the Aramaic word maranatha indicates that the phenomenon of prayer to the risen Jesus in the Christian faith community was already practiced at a very early stage, perhaps antedating Paul in the earliest Judean faith community. I noted examples in Paul where the Lord Jesus is invoked communally by the Christian community (1 Cor 1:2; Rom 10:13–14), and the maranatha prayer appears to reflect the same phenomenon except that it seems to trace its roots to a Judean provenance. In the assessment of 1  Cor 16:22 I note that the criteria for worship is present. The context is religious, the subjects are the Corinthians Christians and the divine object is the risen Jesus, and the level of action between the two is the maranatha prayer. Paul does not explicitly call this a prayer, but due

190

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

to the communicative nature of maranatha in that it addresses a divine object, namely, the risen Lord Jesus, it comes under the category of “prayer.” The fact that the risen Jesus is held to be the object of this prayer implies that early Christians believed and experienced the risen Jesus to be a living reality whose coming was anticipated by them. It also assumes that the risen Jesus can hear their prayer and respond. This act of prayer to the risen Jesus to return implies an act of dependence, but also one of acknowledgment which is realized by ascribing the title of “Lord” to the risen Jesus. Here it should be noted that Paul places the risen Jesus not only within the context of Christian worship, but in the case of 1 Cor 16:22, Paul views the risen Jesus as an object of an expression of worship, namely, that of prayer. Here we encounter a level of action by way of a practical expression in the faith community. We are not told how often the maranatha is uttered, and it is not clear how widespread this was in Paul’s other faith communities, as it only appears in 1 Cor 16:22. The faith community in Corinth by collectively uttering the maranatha is showing their complete dependence on the risen Jesus as Lord, and are petitioning him to return. At the same time that they are making this petition, they are also making an eschatological affirmation by way of an implicit reference to the parousia, that the risen Jesus will be the ultimate Lord. The aspect in worship that emerges from the maranatha prayer is that of complete dependence of the servants on their Lord, as well as the expectation of the advent of their Lord. They desire the presence of the Lord to be fully realized in person, thus their petition to him for his parousia.401

5.4. Pauline Prayers to the Risen Jesus We have seen that Paul endorsed communal prayer to the risen Jesus in his faith communities by way of invocation (Rom 10:9–14; 1 Cor 1:2), even employing as we have just seen an Aramaic communal prayer used by the Judean Jerusalem church to the risen Jesus to hasten the parousia (1  Cor 16:22). While Paul as we have seen usually places God in the forefront of Christian worship, it is also evident that in a few places Paul also includes the risen Jesus in the category of worship, particularly when it comes to prayer / invocation, although this is seldom done by Paul. At this point I would like to examine Paul himself, and his own personal prayer life in relation to the risen Jesus. The area of personal prayer in respect to Paul is one which has tended to be neglected and overlooked in the study of worship. Bauckham correctly remarks that: “The NT evidence for personal prayer to Jesus has sometimes been underestimated.”402 We turn to an account that Paul shares in which he appears to use the language of “prayer.”

PRACTICAL EXPRESSIONS OF WORSHIP IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

| 191

5.4.1. 2 Corinthians 12:8–10 8 u`pe.r tou,tou tri.j to.n ku,rion pareka,lesa i[na avposth/| avp evmou/ 9 kai. ei;rhke,n moi\ VArkei/ soi h` ca,rij mou h` ga.r du,namij evn avsqenei,a| telei/tai h[dista ou=n ma/llon kauch,somai evn tai/j avsqenei,aij i[na evpiskhnw,sh| evp evme. h` du,namij tou/ Cristou/ 10 dio. euvdokw/ evn avsqenei,aij evn u[bresin evn avna,gkaij evn diwgmoi/j kai. stenocwri,aij u`pe.r Cristou/\ o[tan ga.r avsqenw/ to,te dunato,j eivmi 8

As to this, three times I appealed to the Lord in order that it might depart from me.9 And he said to me, ‘My grace is sufficient for you, for power is made perfect in weakness.’ Most gladly therefore I will rather boast in my weaknesses in order that the power of Christ might dwell in me. 10 Therefore, I am well pleased in weaknesses, in insults, in distress, in persecutions and difficulties for the sake of Christ. For whenever I am weak, then I am strong.

In this passage, Paul is dealing with a problem that is afflicting him following a number of visions and revelations which he claims he received from the Lord, which is most probably the risen Jesus himself (2 Cor 12:1–4).403 As a result of these visionary and revelatory experiences which he claims occurred fourteen years before, he speaks of being taken up to the third heaven or paradise, and experiencing grand revelations. To keep Paul from being conceited because of the grand nature of his heavenly experiences (2 Cor 12:5–7), Paul claims that he was given an affliction, which he also called a messenger of Satan. Paul calls this affliction a sko,loy th/| sarki, / “thorn in the flesh” (2 Cor 12:7).404 A number of interpretations have been offered by scholars as to what exactly this “thorn in the flesh” was. I will not address the identification of Paul’s “thorn in the flesh” as it is not directly germane to the topic at hand, but only note that it afflicted him to the point that he resolutely sought relief from it.405 What is of particular interest here is that we have a personal testimony from Paul himself about his condition and the action that he took by way of appeal. Paul claims that as a result of the affliction he experienced with the thorn in the flesh he appealed three times to to.n ku,rion / “the Lord” that it would leave him.406 I will begin first by identifying who “the Lord” is that Paul is appealing to. The title ku,rioj / “Lord” is the favorite Pauline title for the risen Jesus which Paul employs in his letters, whereas, he usually reserves the title qeo,j for God the Father (Rom 1:3–4; 10:9; 1 Cor 8:6; 12:3; 2 Cor 4:5; Phil 2:11).407 Another point which appears to reveal that the ku,rioj whom Paul addresses in this text is the risen Jesus is Paul’s reference in 2 Cor 12:9 to the h` du,namij tou/ Cristou / “the power of Christ” (a Pauline hapax legomenon) as indicative of the identity of the ku,rioj as the risen Jesus who responds to Paul, that power is made perfect in weakness.408 Paul goes on to state that he is content to endure weaknesses and hardship for “the sake of Christ” (2 Cor 12:10). Paul’s focus appears to be on the risen Lord Jesus. The Lord whom Paul claims he appealed thus appears

192

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

to be the risen Jesus himself. If this is so, then we have an interesting situation where Paul personally addresses the Lord Jesus in “prayer” and 2  Cor 12:8–10 remains the only example in the Pauline corpus of an individual personal prayer offered up to the risen Jesus by Paul himself.409 The communicative nature of prayer is seen in that Paul makes the appeal to the Lord (2 Cor 12:8), and the Lord responds (2 Cor 12:9). The word Paul uses to express his appeal to the risen Jesus is the verb parakale,w, which is defined in the context of prayer as to “[s] ummon to one’s aid, call upon for help.”410 This word is only used here in the NT as a petitionary prayer.411 Louw and Nida define the term in its semantic domain as “to ask for something earnestly and with propriety—‘to ask for (earnestly), to request, to plead for, to appeal to, earnest request, appeal.”412 Liddell and Scott note that this verb was used in Greek literature to invoke the gods.413 Plato used it to refer to a person calling on the god Dionysus.414 BDAG similarly notes that parakale,w is used generally of calling upon a deity.415 Outside of Paul’s letters, particularly in the writings of Josephus, parakale,w is used in the context of prayer to God.416 This indicates that Josephus recognized the use of parakale,w in a religious context where God is the direct object. Josephus saw this word as denoting the idea of communication with God and thus corresponding to the category of “prayer.” Schmitz notes that “[t]he noun means either ‘request’ or ‘invocation in prayer.’”417 Longenecker also includes parakale,w in the list of words used by Paul for “prayer.”418 We can conclude from these points that the verb parakale,w can be used in a religious context, and when it is so used it denotes prayer or communication with God or the gods or divine beings. Schmitz notes: “It is striking how seldom the word [parakalei/n] occurs for calling on God or the risen Christ in prayer.”419 While Schmitz admits that parakalei/n is seldom used in Paul’s letters, it nonetheless appears in a crucial moment in Paul’s life where he lays open his heart’s petitions to the risen Jesus. It need not be striking, according to Schmitz, that parakalei/n only appears in 2 Cor 12:8–10, for as noted, Paul is not committed to any one word for “prayer” just as he is not confined to only one word for “worship” in his letters. What is important is the context in which this word appears, and as noted the religious context indicates that the communication between the human subject (Paul), and the divine object (the Lord Jesus), along with the level of action (parakale,w) displayed, suggests that prayer is being offered, and thus according to my criteria, worship takes place. Margaret Thrall recognizes and notes that the risen Christ here in this Pauline text “possessed divine status,”420 and this appears to be predicated on the understanding that the context is a religious one. C. K. Barrett asserts that this is an “earnest and repeated prayer” on Paul’s part.421 David Stanley comments: “Thus it becomes very clear that Paul did actually pray to Christ who was so intensely real a person in his life.”422 A number of scholars are

PRACTICAL EXPRESSIONS OF WORSHIP IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

| 193

convinced that what we encounter in 2 Cor 12:8–10 is a prayer to the risen Jesus.423 This is the only place in the Pauline letters where Paul personally addresses the risen Jesus in prayer.424 Paul’s description of his prayer or appeal to the Lord Jesus being made “three times” indicates at the very least that his practice of appealing to the Lord Jesus was not infrequent or a onetime event. Whether this terminology is idiomatic or literal is beside the point. Paul prayed to the Lord Jesus more than once. Furthermore, the reference by Paul to the “three times” in which he made his appeal to the risen Lord Jesus appears to be indicative of a prayer context. Prayer is sometimes described as being offered three times a day in the OT (Ps 55:16–17; Dan 6:10, 13). In Judaism, the number three is associated with prayer.425 Second Corinthians 12:8–10 also fits the description and meets Neyrey’s five characteristic elements for prayer.426 Paul’s prayer to the risen Jesus also suggests that he is alive and attentive to the pleas of his followers and ready to respond to their petitions. This communicative relationship Paul has with the risen Jesus also presupposes not only that Jesus is alive by virtue of his resurrection, but also, that the risen Jesus can hear prayer. This presumes an awareness of the omnipresence of the Lord Jesus in that he can hear prayer regardless of location.427 In 2 Cor 12:9 the object of Paul’s prayer, the risen Jesus, responds to him, and the response to Paul’s petition is in the negative. The response of the risen Jesus is cited as a direct speech to Paul, which he claims to have heard probably in some revelatory experience,428 but Paul is not altogether clear on this. What is also of interest here is that Paul believed that the Lord Jesus had the power to remove this “thorn in the flesh,” but that it was not his will to do so, and hence Paul’s request was not granted.429 As Dunn notes: “The implication . . . is that the exalted Lord could effect an alteration of Paul’s personal circumstances.” 430 Victor Paul Furnish states that Paul believed that in response to his prayer he received “a proclamation addressed to Paul by the risen and exalted Christ” even though “the apostle’s prayers go unanswered”431 in respect to his “thorn in the flesh.” The risen Jesus responds to Paul in saying h` ca,rij mou (“my grace”), Varkei/ soi (“is sufficient for you”).432 The mention of grace being the possession of the risen Jesus is attested elsewhere in Paul’s farewell benedictions where he consistently appeals to h` ca,rij, “the grace,” used with the genitive, “of the / our Lord Jesus Christ” to be with his communities (Rom 16:20; 1 Cor 16:23; 2 Cor 13:13; Gal 6:18; Phil 4:23; 1 Thess 5:28; Phlm 25).433 Paul accepts this answer to prayer and comes to acknowledge the purpose of his thorn in the flesh to be a means whereby the power of Christ would rest on him. Here we note that Paul also acknowledged that answer to prayer was contingent on the divine will, in this case the will of the Lord Jesus. Paul’s boast is not necessarily on the power of Christ

194

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

itself, but rather as Furnish stresses, Paul boasts that the power of Christ resides in him and this gives him occasion to delight in this awareness.434 If Paul’s weakness is the visible sign of Christ’s presence in him, then Paul reasons he is in actual fact strong and not weak. Paul sees his weakness with the thorn in the flesh to be sufficient according to Thrall for Paul to communicate the notion of the Lord’s power and presence in him.435 The indwelling presence of Christ in this case would imply the most intimate form of relationship between Paul and the risen Jesus, and this intimacy may explain Paul’s readiness to address the risen Jesus in prayer. In 2 Cor 12:10 Paul goes on to continue this theme of “power” being made perfect in weakness, but he also adds insults, hardships, persecutions, and calamities to the list. All of these Paul says he endures and suffers for the sake of Christ. Paul’s willingness to suffer these things for the sake of Christ again reveals his close relationship with the risen Jesus. Thrall raises the question, why did Paul address prayer to the risen Jesus instead of God?436 When dealing with the “thorn in the flesh,” why did Paul not rather address God as he customarily does in his prayers? Why the risen Jesus? Paul does not offer any justification for this practice, but instead, presumes and expects his audience to be familiar with such a practice. The lack of any justification for Paul’s act of praying to the risen Jesus is a safe basis to assume that this was an accepted Christian practice at least with Paul and his communities. Paul’s personal and devotional prayer demonstrates “a communally accepted feature of Christian devotional praxis.”437 Barnett comments: “That Paul can make this statement without further comment shows that both he and his readers understood that they could pray to the glorified Jesus.”438 Hurtado further comments that this practice of addressing the risen Jesus in prayer already appears to be a firmly established, one which finds “no analogy in Roman-era Jewish groups for the characteristic linking of Jesus with God in the prayer practice reflected in Paul’s letters.”439 A number of scholars recognizing that the context of 2 Cor 12:8–10 is that of prayer have called into question whether Paul actually prayed to the risen Jesus. Part of the reason is that there has been a strong conviction among a number of scholars that Paul prayed only to God and not to Jesus.440 This point that Paul prayed only to God was vehemently argued and defended by Lucien Cerfaux.441 Moule also expressed uncertainty that the referent (“the Lord”) in this appeal is to Christ.442 Ernst Käsemann denied that prayers were offered to the risen Jesus in early Christianity.443 The difficulty with this passage is tangibly evident in Delling’s words when he comments that “[i]n Paul the reference of prayer to Christ is linked expressly only with the prayer of thanks to God,”444 and here Delling seeks to remove the actual object of Paul’s intended prayer from the risen Jesus to God. However, Delling accepts the referent in 2 Cor 12:8–10 to whom Paul makes his appeal to be Christ the ku,rioj,445 and it is clearly to the Lord (to.n ku,rion) who is

PRACTICAL EXPRESSIONS OF WORSHIP IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

| 195

Jesus, that Paul prays to in this instance and not God per se. Delling then seems to confuse matters further when he states that he feels that the question of whether Jesus was prayed to cannot be answered satisfactorily in the affirmative, or negative, thus offering a stalemate.446 This, however, is unnecessary since the passage is clear that the risen Lord Jesus is the object of Paul’s prayer. We have shown above that Delling lacks a proper definition of worship and has no criteria for establishing the practice of worship.447 Here we note something similar in regard to prayer. Delling does not provide a proper definition of prayer or a working set of criteria for prayer. If worship is not properly and adequately defined, then any expression associated with worship such as prayer will likewise be improperly and inadequately defined. It is the absence of this root definition and criteria for worship which seems to lead Delling to these convoluted conclusions regarding the place of the risen Jesus in Christian worship, and whether he was a recipient of prayer. Even Bauckham while recognizing that the risen Jesus was worshipped in the early Christian community nevertheless states: “Petitionary prayer to Jesus is not, as such, worship of Jesus.”448 The question, however, must be raised against Bauckham, if petitionary prayer to Jesus is not worship, then what is it? How do we define it or in what category do we place it? What type of level of action is described by prayer? While I have discussed above that prayer is never called “worship” by Paul, he does nevertheless closely associate it with worship as we saw in Rom 1:9–10. Prayer implies worship in that God, or in the case of 2 Cor 12:8–10, the risen Jesus is the implied object. Prayer cannot function or be exercised without a divine or heavenly referent or object. Prayer assumes that God, or in this case, the risen Jesus, can hear the petitions of believers. Prayer also implies worship in that God or the risen Jesus is acknowledged as the one who can grant the requests or petitions of the believers. This also indicates that prayer implies a level of dependence on God or the risen Jesus by the faithful. In this case, prayer functions as a subset of worship in that it implies worship to God by acknowledging him, and thereby honoring him. The text of 2 Cor 12:8–10 fits into the mold of prayer. Gordon Wiles, who dedicated a whole work to Paul’s intercessory prayers,449 does not in an exegetical manner fully deal with 2 Cor 12:8–10, but only mentions it very briefly, and in passing with no comment on its addressee being the risen Jesus.450 Wiles admits that the language of 2 Cor 12:8–10 denotes prayer when he comments: “[T]his [2 Cor 12:8–10] is the only place where Paul gives direct insight into his private petitions for himself.”451 How Wiles in a major book on the subject of Paul’s intercessory prayers could neglect commenting on the significance of the addressee of this prayer as the risen Jesus is candidly surprising. Conzelmann surprisingly asserts that both God and Christ are addressed in prayer here but that a distinction is made.452 But in 2 Cor 12:8–10 as we have seen it is clearly the Lord

196

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

Jesus who is being addressed in prayer and not God per se. Conzelmann further suggests that the distinction is between private and official prayers. Conzelmann states that private petitions may be addressed to the risen Jesus and he cites 2 Cor 12:8 in support of this view, but official prayers are addressed to God. This distinction, however, appears to be purely arbitrary on Conzelmann’s part as this would assume that there was one standard word for official prayer. While Paul speaks of his own personal private prayer to the risen Jesus in 2 Cor 12:8–10, this does not rule out the possibility that the risen Jesus was also a recipient of the official communal prayers of the Pauline communities, which seems to be well attested as we have seen above in Rom 10:9–13; 1 Cor 1:2, 16:22. Greeven makes the comment that the technical words for “prayer” itself are never used in reference to the risen Jesus as its object, “proseu,cesqai and proskunei/n are never used with reference to prayer to the exalted Lord.”453 Greeven, like a number of other scholars, make the same mistake here in assuming that in order for a bona fide case of prayer to be present in Paul he must use the verb proseu,cesqai. We have argued however as Longenecker has shown, that Paul was not restricted in his vocabulary nor did he use any one standard word for prayer in his letters, but rather, employed a number of words to express the action of communication with God.454 The verb parakale,w as we have seen when used in a religious context does take on the meaning of “prayer” because it expresses communication with a divine object. Greeven’s second point that Paul never uses the verb proskunei/n in reference to prayer to the risen Jesus is misleading. This verb as we have seen was not the only word for Paul that could communicate the notion of worship in a religious context. I have also argued that proskune,w is only used once by Paul in 1 Cor 14:25 and that it is a Pauline hapax legomenon. This supports the argument that Paul did not have one standard word for “worship” and that proskune,w was only one word in his grammatical apparatus which Paul only cared to use once. Greeven appears to make these unsubstantiated statements because he, like some scholars we have examined, does not provide a proper working definition for worship nor does he supply criteria for establishing worship. This reinforces the importance and the need of a proper definition and criteria for worship. Cerfaux and Moule also do not employ any particular criteria or proper definition for worship and simply assume that Paul’s prayer in 2 Cor 12:8–10 as an expression of worship could not possibly be offered to the risen Jesus since worship belongs to God alone. Cerfaux and Moule also dismiss too quickly the identification of the Lord whom Paul addresses as the risen Jesus. The title “Lord” as we have seen is Paul’s preferred titular designation for the risen Jesus. Käsemann also dismisses the evidence too quickly and gives no justifiable reason for rejecting the Lord in 2 Cor 12:8–10 as the risen Jesus. Bauckham is not clear when he argues that petitionary prayer to the risen Jesus is not as he says “worship of Jesus.” In his

PRACTICAL EXPRESSIONS OF WORSHIP IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

| 197

research, Bauckham provides no examples either from biblical or Greco-Roman texts which indicate that prayer was ever offered to anyone but God / the gods or those perceived to have divine status. Bauckham actually agrees with my position regarding prayer as a marker of worship. Herrmann has argued that God was the sole object of prayer and supplication.455 The notion of offering prayer to anyone but God appears to be foreign in Second Temple Judaism because, according to Bauckham, Second Temple Judaism was mainly monotheistic and would broker no rivals for worship other than God.456 Bauckham, however, does not define worship here, so it is difficult to understand how he treats the concepts of prayer and worship and their relation to each other. If prayer is an expression and characteristic of worship as I argue, and prayer is offered to the risen Jesus both communally as we have seen (Rom 10:9– 14; 1 Cor 1:2; 16:22), and individually as we see in 2 Cor 12:8–10, then would it not follow that the risen Jesus can be said to be worshipped? My criteria appears to confirm this position. That prayers were communally offered to the risen Jesus can be seen from the maranatha prayer in 1 Cor 16:22, which most scholars view as a vocative of address to the risen Lord. Moreover, I also noted that the risen Jesus was communally invoked by the faith community (Rom 10:9–14; 1 Cor 1:2), and as Longenecker has noted, invocation is part of the category of “prayer” since evpikale,w “appears in prayer contexts.”457 To conclude, in 2 Cor 12:8–10 we encounter a unique text where Paul personally addresses the Lord three times to remove an affliction which he terms a “thorn in the flesh.” We have seen that the Lord whom Paul addresses is the risen Jesus as the title “Lord” is Paul’s favorite and usual title for the risen Jesus. In this text, Paul employs the verb parakale,w, which means to call upon for help. We noted that the verb parakale,w is used outside of Paul in religious contexts to refer to communication with God or the gods and therefore comes under the category of “prayer.” We argued that Paul did not have any one standard word for “prayer” but rather that he employed a number of words to communicate the notion of communication with God. The English word prayer is a standard term which encompasses the idea of communication with God, but this is not the case with Paul and his vocabulary. In the case of 2 Cor 12:8–10, it is the risen Jesus who is the object of Paul’s appeal. We conclude that in 2 Cor 12:8–10 we do have an example of prayer or communication being offered to a divine object, namely, to the risen Jesus. If prayer is a practical expression of worship, then we conclude that worship is being expressed to the risen Jesus. What we have examined in this passage appears to support the proposed criteria for worship. The context is religious because Paul is seeking supernatural healing from his “thorn in the flesh” from the Lord. Paul is the human subject, and the Lord is the divine object. The level of action which is being expressed is that of parakale,w. Paul assumes that the risen Lord Jesus is alive, that

198

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

he can hear him, and that he has the power to remove the thorn in the flesh which is afflicting Paul. Paul offers no explanation or justification for his prayer to the risen Jesus but appears to expect his readers to be familiar with this practice. When Paul receives the response from the risen Lord that he will not remove his thorn in the flesh and that in Paul’s weakness the power of Christ is manifested, Paul accepts this as the divine will and intends to suffer afflictions for the sake of Christ. While prayer is usually addressed to God in Paul, we find in 2 Cor 12:8–10 the only text where Paul personally and individually prays to the risen Jesus. Cullmann correctly notes that “[a]lmost all New Testament prayers are addressed to God, and only very much by way of exception to Christ.”458 Even if we possess a few references to prayers to the risen Jesus, they are significant nonetheless in showing the risen Jesus as an object of prayer especially in Paul. In light of these findings, the statement by Hunter that “[s]strictly speaking, the Pauline letters contain almost nothing that can be described as personal or public prayer”459 is a claim that cannot be substantiated. For Paul, prayer was both communal or public and personal and private as we have seen in 2 Cor 12:8–10.

5.5. Prayers Addressed to Both God and the Risen Jesus: Wish Prayers We have seen above that Paul addressed prayers to both God (Rom 1:9–10; cf. 2 Tim 1:3; Phil 4:6) and to the risen Jesus, both communally (1 Cor 16:22), and privately (2 Cor 12:8–10). For Paul, God and the risen Jesus could be addressed separately from each other. I will now examine some Pauline texts below where both God and the risen Jesus are addressed conjointly in prayer. The prayers we will now turn our attention to are usually termed “wish prayers.” Scholars have generally divided the bulk of Pauline prayers into two categories: (1) wish prayers and (2) prayer reports.460 I will focus our attention mainly on the former, namely, wish prayers. A “wish” prayer involves a desire or wish on the part of the petitioner for an individual or for a group who are in his or her mind, that God would grant a certain benefaction to him or her, or them. Wiles defines a wish prayer as “the expression of a desire that God take action regarding the person(s) mentioned in the wish [prayer].”461 Wish prayers also appear in the OT and Second Temple Jewish literature.462 A wish prayer usually refers to God obliquely and uses the third person and the optative form of the Greek verb.463 Wish prayers usually contain the word “may” in English translation, and thus indicate the idea of a wish on the part of the one who prays. Wish prayers presuppose that God is ultimately sovereign and ultimately in control of all events. This denotes dependence on the part of the worshipper on God where God functions as

PRACTICAL EXPRESSIONS OF WORSHIP IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

| 199

the spiritual master and father over his servants and children, and as such, his will is supreme and ultimate. The servant / child will obtain his or her “wish” provided that the heavenly master / father concurs with it, permits it, and allows it. The will of the master / father is paramount and necessary. The acts and allowances of the servant / child are thus contingent on the master’s / father’s will. An example of this “wish” prayer is found in what is believed to be the earliest of Paul’s letters: 1 Thessalonians.

5.5.1. 1 Thessalonians 3:11–13 11Auvto.j de. o` qeo.j kai. path.r h`mw/n kai. o` ku,rioj h`mw/n VIhsou/j kateuqu,nai th.n o`do.n h`mw/n pro.j u`ma/j\ 12u`ma/j de. o` ku,rioj pleona,sai kai. perisseu,sai th/| avga,ph| eivj avllh,louj kai. eivj pa,ntaj kaqa,per kai. h`mei/j eivj u`ma/j 13 eivj to. sthri,xai u`mw/n ta.j kardi,aj avme,mptouj evn a`giwsu,nh| e;mprosqen tou/ qeou/ kai. patro.j h`mw/n evn th/| parousi,a| tou/ kuri,ou h`mw/n VIhsou/ meta. pa,ntwn tw/n a`gi,wn auvtou/. 11 Now

may our God and Father himself and our Lord Jesus direct our way to you.12 May the Lord make your love abound and exceed to one another and to all just as ours does for you.13 So that your hearts are established in holiness, to be blameless before our God and Father at the coming of our Lord Jesus with all his holy ones.

Since Paul is our earliest Christian writer, and if 1 Thessalonians is Paul’s earliest letter, then 1 Thessalonians contains the earliest and first written source of Christian prayer(s). The text of 1  Thess 3:11–13 is the first example of a “wish prayer” in Paul.464 What should be noted is the appearance of the English word “may” in this text as an indicator of a wish prayer. Morris calls this “an actual prayer.”465 Beverly Gaventa notes that we encounter in this text a “formal ‘prayer-wish’ . . . a prayer couched in the optative mood (the language of the strong wish).”466 O’Brien points out that phrases in the wish prayer of 1 Thess 3:11–13 were probably used “in prePauline Christian worship.”467 If O’Brien is correct, then this moves this wish prayer farther back before Paul. Fee notes that the ease with which Paul employs his wish prayers “suggests that this has long been a part of his life of devotion.”468 I note here again that there is no particular word in the text that means “prayer.” The indicator that communication with the divine object is present is the use as noted above of the optative mood, which according to Daniel Wallace is used “to express an obtainable wish or prayer. It is frequently an appeal to the will, in particular when used in prayers.”469 What can be deduced from this is that the notion of prayer does not have to be communicated by any particular standard word. The indicator is not only grammatical alone, but I suggest the context is also important to indicate that prayer is present, and hence worship is present because the context is a religious one. I understand the context to be religious for the following reasons.

200

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

The text of 1 Thess 3:11–13 presents first a wish prayer to both God and the risen Jesus (3:11),470 and then secondly, a prayer specifically directed to the risen Lord Jesus (3:12–13). The terms “God” and “Lord” are used respectively for the Father and the risen Jesus in 1 Thess 3:11. We see in this text that not only is the context religious because it has God as the referent or the divine object, but I also note that Paul also includes the risen Jesus within the same religious context. The inclusion of the risen Jesus with God in this first Pauline letter indicates that from an early stage the risen Jesus was included with God in the religious context and life of the early Christian community. Paul is the first NT writer to include the risen Jesus in such a religious context. It is interesting that while Hunter, in dealing with wish prayers in Paul, mentions that a characteristic feature was that God was obliquely referred to in the third person, he makes no mention of the fascinating point that the risen Jesus is also included with God in this wish prayer.471 In 1 Thess 3:11, Paul offers up a wish prayer in that he asks that God the Father and the Lord Jesus direct the way for him and his associates to see the Thessalonian believers. Paul makes this statement in light of his previous statement that Satan had hindered their way to the Thessalonians before (1 Thess 2:18). Paul’s wish therefore to both God and the risen Jesus is that they both direct his way (and those of his associates), to the Thessalonians. Hurtado comments: That these expressions [wish prayers] are to be taken as genuine prayers is confirmed by 1 Thess. 3:11–13, where in a similar form of expression “our God and Father himself and our Lord Jesus” are implored both to allow Paul to visit the Thessalonian church again and to bless the believers richly so that they are prepared for the return of Christ.472

Charles Wanamaker similarly comments that: This [1 Thess 3:11–13] . . . is the earliest documented evidence of the profound change in prayer language that took place in Christianity as the early Christian community moved away from traditional Jewish prayers, where God alone was addressed or invoked, to the address and invocation of both God and Jesus Christ.473

This conjoining by Paul of both God and the risen Jesus in a wish prayer is a feature peculiar to only 1 and 2 Thessalonians.474 If 1 Thessalonians is our earliest Pauline letter (and therefore the earliest Christian written document), then we can state that from the earliest written Christian record, prayer in the Pauline faith communities was addressed particularly to two divine persons: God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.475 Hurtado deduces from this point that already in the 50’s CE it was considered common among Christian believers, at least in the Pauline communities, not only to link the risen Jesus with God in prayer, but also to view

PRACTICAL EXPRESSIONS OF WORSHIP IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

| 201

him as the co-source of the blessings and petitions invoked in Christian worship gatherings.476 In this case, we can posit the idea that Paul saw the risen Jesus as a co-recipient in prayer with God, and Paul is the first to introduce this practice.477 A number of scholars have acknowledged this point. Hurtado notes concerning wish prayers in Paul that they “reflect actual prayer practices, and in which God and Jesus were addressed and invoked together.”478 This recalls Aune’s definition of Christian worship noted above that it “can be understood as the reverent homage paid to God and Christ in the context of a Christian assembly.”479 It is odd therefore when Hunter asserts that “his [Paul’s] wish prayers . . . do not evidence prayer to Christ, either as petition or intercession.”480 Not only does Paul speak of God obliquely in the third person, he also refers to Jesus the Lord obliquely in the third person as well in 1 Thess 3:11. This description fits Hunter’s own definition of a wish prayer, which as noted above means that a wish prayer usually refers to God obliquely and uses the third person and the optative form of the Greek verb.481 Fee482 also takes Wiles483 to task for downplaying the role of the risen Jesus in the wish prayer found in 1 Thess 3:11–13 where the risen Jesus is clearly an intended object of prayer by Paul. Fee notes that the singular verb kateuqu,nai used in 1 Thess 3:11, is used of both God and Christ, indicating that Paul understood God and Christ to be conjointly involved in directing his way to the Thessalonian believers.484 That Paul could appeal to both God and the risen Jesus to direct and guide him and his associates also indicates that Paul believed that both God and the risen Jesus had the divine power to accomplish such a wish. The optative verb thus refers to the action of both God and Jesus conjointly. F. F. Bruce notes that the idea of directing a person’s way is one of a divine prerogative,485 and one which is attested in the OT where YHWH is the one who guides and directs the faithful.486 In 1  Thess 3:12, Paul continues to employ the optative pleona,sai, but the third person singular referent this time is o` ku,rioj, “the Lord,” who as we have seen in Pauline usage is the risen Jesus.487 In 3:12–13 it is Jesus the Lord specifically who becomes the referent of the prayer.488 The context is still a religious one as it flows from 3:11 and the risen Lord is the object in 3:12–13 whom Paul addresses. As we have seen in the treatment of 2 Cor 12:8–10 above, Paul did in fact directly address the risen Jesus in prayer. What we see in 1 Thess 3:12–13 is that Paul was already engaged in this practice from the earliest time given the supposed early date of 1 Thessalonians. In 1 Thess 3:13, Paul offers up another wish prayer to the risen Jesus that he strengthen the hearts of the Thessalonians in holiness so that they will be blameless before God the Father at the parousia. To summarize, I recall my definition and criteria for worship. I note that the context of 1 Thess 3:11–13 is a religious one because the direct object is both God and the Lord Jesus, who are divine referents, and who in 3:11 are conjointly

202

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

appealed to. The human subject is Paul, who exercises the level of action of wishing, and desiring in prayer, that both God and the risen Lord Jesus grant his petition to direct his way to see the Thessalonian Christians. Since the context is religious, and we have a human subject and a divine object (God and the risen Jesus), and a level of action by way of a wish prayer, we conclude that worship takes place, and that such worship is expressed in Paul’s wish prayer. We also see that the wish prayer functions as a level of action wherein Paul depends on the will and direction of God and / or the risen Jesus to grant his wish or desire. Here we see the dependence of the worshipper on the divine object, which is characteristic of the worship model.

5.5.2 2 Thessalonians 2:16–17 In 2 Thess 2:16–17, we encounter a similar passage and construction to that of the text we examined above in 1 Thess 3:11–13.489 The text of 2 Thess 2:16–17 is consistent with what we find in 1 Thessalonians.490 In this text, both God and the risen Jesus are also addressed in a wish prayer, although in this text the order is reversed with “the Lord” mentioned first and “God” second.491 The text of 2 Thess 2:16–17 reads: 16Auvto.j de. o` ku,rioj h`mw/n VIhsou/j Cristo.j kai. Îo`Ð qeo.j o` path.r h`mw/n o` avgaph,saj h`ma/j kai. dou.j para,klhsin aivwni,an kai. evlpi,da avgaqh.n evn ca,riti 17 parakale,sai u`mw/n ta.j kardi,aj kai. sthri,xai evn panti. e;rgw| kai. lo,gw| avgaqw/|  / 16 May our Lord Jesus Christ himself and God our Father, who loved us and gave us eternal comfort and good hope by his grace, 17 comfort your hearts and establish you in every good work and word.”

Note the appearance of the English word “may” in the text, which as shown above is a necessary ingredient in a wish prayer. No particular word for “prayer” appears, but the optative mood and context indicates that a wish prayer is being offered. This text does not introduce anything new by way of God and Christ both being recipients of prayer as 1  Thess 3:11–13 has already shown. Second Thessalonians 2:16–17 is rather confirmatory in nature with what we already know from the former passage. This passage also has the singular verbs parakale,sai and sthri,xai in 2:17 and the verbs are optative. Attention was given primarily to the “Lord” in 1 Thess 3:11–13, in this passage attention is given to “God our Father,” who loved us and through his grace gave eternal comfort and good hope. The act of comforting and strengthening, however, are both attributed as a joint action to the Lord Jesus and to God the Father here. Both these prayers in 1 Thess 3:11–13 and 2 Thess 2:16–17 according to Fee “seem intentionally addressed to both God the Father and the Lord Jesus.”492 The inclusion of the Lord Jesus with God the Father in a religious context indicates that prayer to both occurs while at the same

PRACTICAL EXPRESSIONS OF WORSHIP IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

| 203

time indicating that worship is also taking place. The wish prayer thus becomes the level of action whereby the human subject relates to the divine object.

5.5.3. 2 Thessalonians 3:5 Another instance where one finds a wish prayer is in 2  Thess 3:5. This text is unique in that the wish prayer in this text is addressed by Paul to the Lord alone. From a Pauline perspective this is not unusual, for as we have seen, Paul directly addressed the risen Jesus in prayer (2 Cor 12:8–10; cf. 1 Thess 3:12–13). Second Thessalonians 3:5 states, ~O de. ku,rioj kateuqu,nai u`mw/n ta.j kardi,aj eivj th.n avga,phn tou/ qeou/ kai. eivj th.n u`pomonh.n tou/ Cristou/ / “May the Lord direct your hearts into the love of God and the endurance of Christ.” Again I note the English word “may” in the text indicating it as a wish prayer. The addressee in the third person is the ku,rioj, “the Lord,” who in the Pauline context is usually the risen Jesus.493 The verb kateuqu,nai is singular and optative, and the optative mood as we pointed out is the grammatical indicator for a wish prayer. This is the same optative verb Paul used in 1 Thess 3:11 to refer to the joint action of both God and Christ. As noted above, the idea of directing a person’s way is one of a divine prerogative which was attributed to YHWH in the OT,494 and its application to Christ “echoes a divine appellation and prerogative now addressed to the risen Lord.”495 Here in 2 Thess 3:5 the prayer is attributed by Paul to Christ the Lord. Paul in this wish prayer desires Christ to direct the hearts of the Thessalonians into the love of God and also the endurance of Christ.496 The wish prayer here functions as the level of action. In the final greeting found in the letter, another wish prayer appears in 2 Thess 3:16, Auvto.j de. o` ku,rioj th/j eivrh,nhj dw,|h u`mi/n th.n eivrh,nhn dia. panto.j evn panti. tro,pw| o` ku,rioj meta. pa,ntwn u`mw/n / “Now may the Lord of peace himself give you peace always in every way. The Lord be with all of you.”497 As in 1 Thess 3:12–13 and 2 Thess 3:5 it is the Lord Jesus who is the object of the prayer, and the verb dw,|h is also optative, thus alerting the reader that a wish prayer is intended. The designation “Lord of peace” only appears in this passage in the Pauline corpus.498 The giving of peace is a divine prerogative which ultimately belongs to YHWH (Num 6:26). In summary, we have seen instances above where at times in Paul’s letters God is the recipient of prayer (Rom 1:9–10; cf. 2  Tim 1:3; Phil 4:6); at other times, although less frequently than God, the risen Jesus is the recipient of prayer (Rom 10:9–14; 1  Cor 1:2; 16:22; 2  Cor 12:8–10). In the examination above, I have noted that prayer was also offered to both God and the risen Jesus conjointly by Paul, particularly in the area of wish prayers where Paul delivers his salutations and greetings to his readership audience. I noted that God and the risen Jesus are referred to in the third person but are nonetheless indirectly the referents of prayer.

204

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

We also discovered that there is no one word for “prayer” in the texts we examined, but that the idea that a wish prayer was present was based on both grammatical and contextual considerations. Prayer is any form of communication with the divine, and these texts we have seen indicate that due to the religious nature of the context and the divine object being addressed by the human subject (Paul), we have the criteria for worship present. We have discovered that there are three wish prayers in the Pauline corpus addressed to both God and the risen Jesus (1 Thess 3:11–13; 2 Thess 2:16–17; 3:5).499 I conclude therefore that Paul considered it legitimate and proper to not only address God the Father and the risen Lord Jesus Christ separately in prayer as we have seen,500 but also conjointly together in prayer. We see in all these texts the aspect of utter dependence on God and the risen Jesus as the source for divine help and assistance. At the same time both God and the risen Jesus are acknowledged as the source of help, and in this respect honor is attributed to both. These wish prayers assume that God and the risen Jesus have the ability and power to direct Paul’s path so that he can meet with the Thessalonians, to increase the love that the Thessalonian believers ought to have for one another, to strengthen their hearts in holiness, to comfort their hearts, and strengthen them in every good work and word. These are requests which assume that both God and the risen Jesus can hear and grant by way of response. This also fits my proposed model of worship which always has the human subject as dependent on the will, provision, and aid of the divine object. A wish prayer therefore functions according to my criteria as a level of action whereby God and / or the risen Jesus are appealed to or called on to grant a particular wish of the human subject. In this respect, wish prayers function as a subset of worship in that God and the risen Jesus either individually or conjointly are acknowledged, and in this way wish prayers imply worship. The aspect of total dependence is a recurring theme in worship as it highlights the submissive relationship of the worshipper upon God.

5.6. Hymns Another expression usually associated with worship is the singing of hymns. In the Pauline corpus, hymns were an integral part of worship in the Christian community and served according to Hurtado as “a characteristic feature of early Christian worship”501 in terms of devotional practice.502 I will only address the subject of hymns in this study in regards to their place in Christian worship in the Pauline corpus. I will not deal with the source or form critical questions regarding hymns or hymn fragments in the NT.503 I will make some comments about the origin of the use of hymns which were later adapted by Paul. Are all hymns worship? To sing a hymn

PRACTICAL EXPRESSIONS OF WORSHIP IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

| 205

does not necessarily mean worship is taking place. A modern secular person may sing the well-known church hymn “Amazing Grace” simply because he or she likes the hymn without necessarily singing it within a religious context and environment. Singing such a hymn in this manner would not constitute worship. What can be deduced from this example is that a hymn in and of itself is not worship. What places a hymn in the category of worship appears to be first and foremost a religious context, and secondly, the intent of the member or members of the faith community: is the hymn being sung from the heart? A secular person can also visit and attend a church service in the modern sense of the word and sing hymns without necessarily believing what the faith community believes. Would this constitute worship? It appears that a hymn by itself is devoid of any worship content. Hymns take on an aspect of worship only when they are motivated by the heart of the worshipper(s) who employs them to function as vehicles of communication in song towards God. While hymns can be sung by individuals, they appear to be more appropriate in the context of a communal setting. This communal setting is usually religious, and this religious context is what infuses hymns with an association with worship. It appears that hymns tend to function as a subset of worship in that they imply worship by means of acknowledging God in song. In this study I will use the terms “hymn,” “song,” and “singing” as synonymous. Paul’s reference to songs in his worshipping communities are taken by most scholars as indicative of his Jewish heritage wherein hymnody would also play a part in the synagogue worship504 especially influenced by the OT Psalter.505 Josephus makes reference to the Psalter, which he claims contained u[mnouj eivj to.n qeo.n / “hymns to God.”506 The use of songs in the temple cult in Jerusalem may also have played a contributing factor (1 Macc 4:54; 2 Macc 1:30; Sir 50:18).507 Martin, however, raises doubts that the Judean synagogue was the matrix of early Christian songs or hymns and rather places the origins of this practice in the temple instead while the Judean synagogue served more of a didactic function.508 Martin admits, however, that the Hellenistic Jewish synagogues in the Diaspora were open to the use of hymns, and it is probable that they are the source of Paul’s use of song in the Christian community.509 This view, however, has also been questioned. The sectarians in Qumran were also known to employ songs in their worship assemblies, and they were not part of the Diaspora.510 Martin’s judgment therefore may be too hasty as he admits that the evidence for worship practices in Judean synagogues of the first century is hard to interpret.511 A contributing factor in the scarcity of such evidence is that as Aune has noted very little is known about the specific nature of Jewish worship in the first century before the codification of the Mishnah toward the end of the second century CE.512 The Pauline background of hymns or spiritual songs in the Christian worshipping community seems to be traced to either the Jewish synagogue at

206

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

least in the Diaspora as Martin contends or to the temple worship, or at the very least to a Jewish cultic setting. The view of the origin of hymns being rooted in the synagogue has been called into serious question by John A. Smith.513 Smith agrees with Aune that the form and content of the synagogue worship service are only well documented from the time of the Mishnah and onwards. Prior to the second century, according to Smith, information regarding the worship format of the synagogue is “sparse.”514 Smith accuses scholars of committing anachronistic errors in trying to reconstruct synagogue worship by reading back into the first century elements of the Mishnah and post-Mishnaic literature.515 I noted that this tendency of reading things back into the texts dealing with worship was also done by Cullmann and Delling, who read Patristic liturgical material back into the NT texts.516 Smith further notes that: “No contemporary sources make any mention of singing in the ancient synagogue during the first and second centuries [CE].”517 This, Smith argues, weakens the argument used by some scholars that the synagogue is the origin of Christian singing. Smith states: “Any claim for the synagogue as the place of origin of early Christian singing is seriously weakened if singing cannot be shown to have occurred there . . . [T]here are no grounds for believing that early Christian singing had anything to do with the synagogue service during the period.”518 If the practice of Christian singing or the use of hymns did not originate in the synagogue, which the evidence seems to support, then where did it originate? The only places where singing appeared to be used in first-century Judaism, according to Smith, was in the temple or in a religious domestic environment such as the home where the Passover ritual for instance was observed.519 Smith notes that: “Within the family or household, singing had a place at formal and informal assemblies. The pertinent formal assemblies are those of Passover, weddings and obsequies.”520 It seems that we are left with either the temple or the religious domestic environment of the Jewish private home assembly521 as the source for the practice of Christian singing. It is possible that the singing in the temple may have influenced the latter.522 Paul referred metaphorically to the whole worshipping community as the temple of God (1  Cor 3:16–17; 2  Cor 6:16–18; Eph 2:21–22) as well as each individual believer’s body as a temple of the Holy Spirit (1  Cor 6:19–20). The emphasis in this metaphor, however, is on the dwelling presence of God with and in his people.523 It is possible that the source of Christian singing is found in the context of the religious domestic environment. The Passover celebration included singing according to the Mishnah (Pesahim 10. 4, 7), but we also have first-century attestation for the singing of a hymn during the Passover in the gospels, especially in Mark 14:26 and Matt 26:30 which narrate that after the Last Supper,524 Jesus and his disciples had sung a hymn (u`mnh,santej), which may have been one of the Hallel psalms sung during the Passover (Pss 113–118).525 Robert Gundry notes that the

PRACTICAL EXPRESSIONS OF WORSHIP IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

| 207

singing of the Hallel psalms was “a custom at the Passover meal,”526 and Philo also attests to the use of hymns at the Passover celebration in the first century CE.527 If this practice in the gospels reflects a Judean provenance, then we have some indication which suggests that the singing of hymns could be practiced in communal groups outside the temple as we see with Jesus and his disciples.528 The association of the hymn with the Last Supper, according to Davies and Allison, may have led early Christians to employ it in their worship assemblies, perhaps in their celebration of the Eucharist.529 In Paul’s treatment of the Eucharist where he recounts what happened at the Last Supper (1 Cor 11:23–25), he says nothing about a hymn being sung at the conclusion of the meal as the gospels do. The religious domestic environment may have also included Paul’s “house churches” (Rom 16:5; 1 Cor 16:19; Col 4:15; Phlm 2)530 where his worshipping communities met in houses or homes and where meals would have most likely taken place including the Eucharist.531 It seems that the most possible origin for the use of hymns in the early Christian movement is to be found in the religious domestic environment of Judaism, most likely in the Passover celebration which carried over into the Eucharistic celebration532 in possible imitation of Jesus and his disciples singing a hymn at the conclusion of the meal. This, however, cannot be concluded solely from Paul’s letters with certainty apart from the gospel traditions. My main interest nonetheless lies in the use of hymns in worship in the Pauline communities. Louw and Nida define the term u[mnoj / “hymn” as “a song with religious content.”533 BDAG defines a hymn in the same way as Louw and Nida but also add that it is used “in honor of a deity.”534 According to my criteria, a religious context which has a personal relational act between a human and a superhuman entity denotes worship. Since a hymn has a “religious content” and is used “in honor of a deity,” it does not necessarily follow that the use of hymns are constitutive of worship itself as noted above, but rather hymns function as a vehicle or a level of action through which its religious content is being communicated either individually by the worshipper or collectively by the worshipping community to a divine object. Since hymns have a religious content, we can place them in a worship setting or at least associate them with worship. Hymns appear to function like prayers but they differ in that they are usually sung.535 Hymns thus appear to function as prayers put to music. Hymns, however, appear to have a fixed form to them536 whereas prayers can vary based on the circumstances. That hymns of a religious nature belong in a worship setting is attested both in biblical and Greco-Roman texts. The Psalter in the OT is an example of the use of hymns in the Jewish tradition, but the actual term used is the “psalms.”537 Philo also attests to the use of hymns in the worship of God when he describes Jewish worship being accompanied mnoij kai. euvcaristi,aij to.n euverge,thn kai. swth/ra qeo.n

208

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

gerai,rontej / “with hymns and thanksgvings, honoring God their Benefactor and Savior.”538 Philo understands that the exercise or use of hymns and thanksgivings by the subjects or worshippers are means or as I argue, the level of action whereby the object God is honored. God is honored with the use of hymns according to Philo because he is both “Benefactor and Savior.” Philo sees a co-relation between the use of hymns and the rendering of honor to God.539 Like Paul, Philo also sees the illegitimate use of expressions that communicate the act of worship to God when it is offered to something other than God. In Philo’s account of the worship of the golden calf incident (cf. Exod 32), he notes that among other things, such as offering “unholy sacrifices” (qusi,aj avqu,touj), the people also sang hymns (u[mnouj), which according to Philo were more like “dirges” (qrh,nwn).540 Philo also understands that when hymns are placed in a religious context, they are used as vehicles or as a level of action to express worship. Philo relates how Gaius wanted to appear to be a god, and how he sought to be worshipped as a god. Philo notes how Gaius had u[mnoij / “hymns” sung to him.541 Here Philo sees the use of hymns in a religious context, and thus a worship context, as illegitimate if God is not the proper object or referent of the hymns. Philo sees this in the case of an inanimate object (the golden calf) and a human being (Gaius). The legitimacy of worship is thus predicated on its object according to Philo and Paul. In Greco-Roman religions, the place of hymns are seen for instance in Cleanthes’s Hymn to Zeus.542 I noted above that one of the ways in which honor was rendered to the gods was by way of music in which choruses and paeans or hymns were sung to the gods as expressions of worship.543 Arrian records that Callisthenes noted that the gods because of their high status were “honored with obeisance” and that “choruses are established for the gods, and paeans are sung to them.”544 Hymns were thus closely associated with worship. The act of singing hymns was also understood in the Roman world to be associated with worship as seen in the second-century letter of Pliny the Younger (112 CE) to the emperor Trajan regarding the worship gathering of Christians in which he stated, “quod essent soliti stato die ante lucem convenire, carmenque Christo quasi deo” / “They [the Christians] were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verses a hymn to Christ, as to a god.”545 While Pliny makes reference to a gathering or meeting here, it is nevertheless a religious gathering because the context bears this out and my proposed criteria for worship is also attested here. Christian believers who are the subjects gather together. The level of action or vehicle whereby they express or render their worship is by way of singing carmenque Christo, a hymn to Christ, who is the object to whom they direct their hymn. The religious context is borne out in the fact that Christ is addressed by way of a hymn quasi deo / “as to a god.” Pliny’s reference to Christ as a god infuses the text with a religious connotation,

PRACTICAL EXPRESSIONS OF WORSHIP IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

| 209

and therefore in this context worship is exercised according to my criteria.546 When the relationship between the subject and the object is a religious one, then the context becomes one of worship, and the expression of worship is mediated by a level or levels of actions of which hymns are one. Hymns thus become a means of rendering honor. The giving of honor as noted was an important element in the paradigm of worship. While the focal point of religious hymns was to the gods in Greco-Roman religion, in the OT and Second Temple Judaism it was YHWH who was the object of hymns.547 In the biblical texts, God is always central in hymnody. Hymns illustrate a specific way of expressing worship, namely, in a vocal aspect, but this is usually done in a communal setting. Aune describes Christian worship as having a verbal character that is “expressed in hymns and prayers which say something about God which are well known to the worshipper.”548 Paul was also aware of speaking silently to God when he gave instructions that if one has the gift of tongues and an interpreter of tongues is absent in the worshipping community, then such persons are to speak only to themselves and to God; in short, they had to be silent (1 Cor 14:27–28).549 Paul believed that one who prays in a tongue prays from his or her spirit, which implies private prayer (1 Cor 14:14).550 Paul sees tongues in this case as also a communicative act in the category of prayer. In hymns the worshipper sings praises to God or sings of God’s goodness; it is an act or level of action which expresses, signifies, and highlights the identity of God by way of acknowledging God, and therefore the rendering of honor plays a factor in this regard. Hymns function in Martin’s words as “reflexive and expressive of gratitude to God.”551 In this respect, hymns are responsive or reactionary; they say something in response to what God has done to or for the worshipper(s). Martin also notes: “Christian hymns keep clear the tremendous distinction between God and man.”552 This reflects the definition of worship I proposed where I noted that the personal relational religious act in worship is illustrated by the distinction of the subject or minor with the object of worship who is the major entity upon whom the subject is fully dependent. The distinction serves to show that God and humans are not on the same level but rather one occupies a higher position than the other, hence the dependence of one on the other. The act of singing is often associated within a context of relationship. Singing or the use of hymns implies a subject-object relationship. In this respect, hymns and songs are communicative vehicles in which the subject is communicating a content of information (whether it be good, bad, joyful, or sad) to the object to whom the hymn or song is directed. 553 If the context is religious, then as I argued worship takes place. Neyrey lists the acts of singing a song, singing a psalm, a hymn, and a paean in the category of “prayer”554 or as “a distinctive kind of prayer essentially different from other prayers.”555 In this sense, Neyrey gives hymns a communicative element like prayer. A hymn is a vehicle or

210

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

an expression which contains a religious content meant to communicate something about God, or to God, while at the same time edifying the worshipping community that collectively sings the hymn together. Worship thus has an effect on the faith community by edifying it. A hymn thus has a two-way aspect to it by way of reference. It refers to God while at the same time having a referential dimension within the worshipping community by way of grounding their identity vis-à-vis the divine object. A modern day example, although it is not a religious one, but a secular one, is the act of singing the national anthem of one’s particular country. One usually sings his or her national anthem collectively or in company with others of the same country, and together they are affirming their identity markers, and boundaries, as members of their country, while at the same time affirming allegiance, and honor to their country, and in so doing, establishing solidarity with each other. The first and only reference by Paul in his letters to the practice of singing in the Christian worshipping community by the use of a “psalm” is found in 1 Cor 14:26.556 This Pauline reference along with only two other references we shall examine below to the practice of singing in the worshipping community, further illustrates that Paul did not conceive of singing as the only practical expression for worship. It was one aspect or a part of the whole mosaic of worship for Paul.

5.6.1. 1 Corinthians 14:26 Ti, ou=n evstin avdelfoi, o[tan sune,rchsqe e[kastoj yalmo.n e;cei didach.n e;cei avpoka,luyin e;cei glw/ssan e;cei e`rmhnei,an e;cei\ pa,nta pro.j oivkodomh.n gine,sqw / “What then is it brothers? When you come together, each one has a psalm, has a teaching, has a revelation, has a tongue, has an interpretation. Let all things be done for edification.”

Paul writes this passage within a section where he addresses issues concerning proper worship in the faith community (1 Cor 10–14). We will only concern ourselves mainly with Paul’s reference to yalmo,j in this passage, but will also briefly address the other points he raises alongside of yalmo,j. Paul’s reference here to the coming together or assembling (sune,rchsqe) of the faith community according to Morris, “means come together for worship.”557 Aune explains that this phrase “is a technical term referring to the assembly of Christians for worship.”558 The underlying tenor in Paul’s wording here is the importance of the communal gathering of the faith community where in such a context, worship is supposed to occur. Morris and Aune, however, seem to say more than the text allows at this point. To come together may not necessarily mean one is coming to worship with others, but in a religious context it may carry that meaning, for the purpose of such a gathering would imply that worship is intended. When Paul refers to the church coming together (sune,rcomai), he speaks of it in a negative context at least four times in

PRACTICAL EXPRESSIONS OF WORSHIP IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

| 211

1 Cor 11:17–18, 20, 34. In dealing with the issue of the Eucharist and the neglecting of the needy in the church, Paul says when they assemble or come together it is “for the worse” (v. 17), “there are divisions among you” (v. 18), “it is not really to eat the Lord’s Supper” (v. 20), and that if they do not change their attitude, it will result in their “condemnation” (v. 34). Paul indicates here that people can assemble or come together for the wrong reasons, or with wrong intentions. Merely coming together does not necessarily denote worship; it is rather the intent and purpose of one’s assembling that Paul appears to be more concerned about. Robertson and Plummer are clearer than Morris and Aune on this point when they state that this phrase refers to assembling for a “religious purpose.”559 I would thus argue that when Paul speaks of believers coming together, worship may be implied, but it is not explicitly stated in this expression, and that the intent and purpose of their gathering is what concerns Paul. Ferdinand Hahn suggests that the coming together of Christian believers is “the significant feature of Christian worship.”560 I would suggest instead that the coming together of believers is a feature or one feature of Christian worship, because as we have seen worship cannot be reduced to only one element. Worship can also be individualistic as well as communal. Paul associates the use of a “psalm” (yalmo,j) within the context of the gathering of the faith community.561 Paul mentions a yalmo,j, which is not technically the word for “hymn,” which is u[mnoj562 (u[mnoj is attested only in Col 3:16 and Eph 5:19 in the NT). The word yalmo,j according to Louw and Nida means “a song of praise (in the NT probably a reference to an OT psalm)—‘song of praise, psalm,’”563 and BDAG supplies the same definition.564 Martin however, doubts whether Paul’s use of yalmo,j is derived from the OT and rather sees it as a composed one by a gifted member of the church.565 This is not relevant to this study as I am more interested in how yalmo,j applies to worship in Paul. The text of 1 Cor 14:26 is the only place in the Pauline letters where yalmo,j in the singular is used and hence is a Pauline hapax legomenon. One cannot deduce from this that the use of song in the worshipping community was unimportant to Paul since he mentions it once in his letters. As in 1 Cor 14:25 where we encountered another Pauline hapax legomenon with the use of proskune,w, so in 1 Cor 14:26 we note that the idea of worship for Paul was not restricted to one particular word, but was rather composed of various words which for Paul communicated various aspects of worship to God. Paul is interested in the relational religious acts between the worshipper and God. In addition to yalmo,j Paul also mentions didach, / “a teaching,” avpoka,luyij / “a revelation, glw/ssa / “a tongue,” and e`rmhnei,a / “an interpretation.” Paul mentions these as various features or expressions that are experienced when the faith community gathers together for worship. I note here that the yalmo,j or song of praise is only one among a series of features of worship. This appears to support

212

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

my contention that for Paul worship is multifaceted and not reducible to only one element. Paul believed that there were diaire,seij (“varieties,” “diversities,” or “different kinds”)566 of “gifts,” “services,” and “activities” that were given to the faith community by the Spirit, the Lord (Jesus), and God (1 Cor 12:4–6). There is plurality of gifts, services, and activities in the unity of the one body of the faith community (cf. 1 Cor 12:11). All of these features in 1 Cor 14:26 are meant to edify or build up the faith community. Here we see a plurality of elements within the unity of the faith community. A “teaching” here most probably would be a piece of Christian instruction or lesson,567 or even an exposition of Scripture.568 A “revelation” would probably involve a prophecy or a revelatory utterance.569 A tongue would be a language prompted by the Spirit, and an interpretation would clarify the tongue that was spoken. What is lacking in 1 Cor 14:26 is the object to whom this song of praise is addressed to. In the context of 1 Cor 14 it is God who is consistently spoken of in terms of being addressed and worshipped (1 Cor 14:2, 25, 28). I argue that since God is the implied object of this psalm or song of praise that we have a religious context here. According to the proposed criteria, if there is a religious context in which a superhuman entity such as a deity is the object, then we have a case for worship. I argue therefore that since yalmo,j is a “song of praise” and that it appears in a religious context with God as the intended object, then it qualifies as an expression whereby worship is being exercised. That worship is intended with the use of yalmo,j is seen in the immediate syntactical context. In the preceding passage in 1 Cor 14:25, Paul had just spoken about the unbeliever being convicted in their worship assembly as falling on his face and performing proskune,w to God.570 The whole purpose for which Paul says the community assembles and shares a song of praise among other things is ultimately for the edification, the building up of the whole faith community. It is interesting that Paul does not state that the use of a song of praise is ultimately for the worship of God, although that is intended, but rather Paul seems to be more concerned with the horizontal dimension of worship in that he wants the faith community to be edified.571 Here we see the two dimensional aspect of worship. The first, the vertical dimension of worship involves the worshipper(s) and God. The second, the horizontal dimension of worship involves the unity of the faith community where their identity is reinforced. Worship according to Paul also builds up the faith community and edifies them. The use of singing was thus seen by Paul as an ingredient of the worshipping community. A. Schlatter assumes too much when he states that “the fact that the hymn / song is mentioned first of all perhaps points to the situation where the assembly began with a song.”572 Paul actually uses as we have seen the technical word “psalm” not “hymn” and he does not specify when such a song would be sung

PRACTICAL EXPRESSIONS OF WORSHIP IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

| 213

in the assembly. We may presume that there was a song but when it occurred is speculative at best. The origin of this use of song is most likely to be found in the use of songs or psalms in the Jewish synagogue and the temple. Paul’s use of yalmo,j seems to suggest that the term itself is drawn out of the LXX and based on the Psalter of the Hebrew OT.573 That Paul places the use of song in a religious and therefore worship context appears in the immediate context where he refers to the worship of God (1 Cor 14:25) and also the wider context where Paul deals with the use of the spiritual gifts in the assembly of the Christian community which convene for the purpose of worshipping God. Paul thus associates spiritual songs with worship and they thus function as a vehicle of worship. The use of song in the Christian worshipping community continued from early times in the Pauline faith communities and later as the singing of hymns are also attested in Eph 5:19 and Col 3:16 to which we now turn.

5.6.2. Ephesians 5:19 lalou/ntej e`autoi/j yalmoi/j kai. u[mnoij kai. wvd| ai/j pneumatikai/j a;d| ontej kai. ya,llontej th/| kardi,a| u`mw/n tw/| kuri,w| / “speaking to one another in psalms, and hymns, and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your hearts to the Lord.”

Whereas 1 Cor 14:26 refers to the use of a yalmo,j / “psalm” in the singular, the text of Eph 5:19 mentions the use of yalmoi/j / “psalms” in the plural.574 Ephesinas 5:19 in addition to mentioning psalms also mentions u[mnoij kai. wv|dai/j pneumatikai/j  / “hymns and spiritual songs.” Paul is employing the three most important LXX terms for the religious song that in the OT has YHWH as its referent.575 Delling notes that these same three words are attested in Greek writings.576 Here Paul expands further on this aspect of worship. The mention of the terms yalmoi/j, u[mnoij and wv|dai/j pneumatikai/j (psalms, hymns, spiritual songs) seems to suggest that there was an emphasis on singing in the worship gathering of the audience of this letter. The vocal aspect of worship I suggest was important to this faith community. It is not germane to this study to investigate each of these words independently of each other but only to investigate them in respect to their application to the theme of worship.577 Here we observe a two-dimensional aspect in worship. The vertical dimension of worship has the Lord in view here. In this passage it should be noted that the referent of the psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs is tw/| kuri,w| (“the Lord”), who is the risen Jesus.578 The use of the dative article tw/| points to the object of the hymn,579 namely, “the Lord.” The image here is that of corporate singing to the risen Lord Jesus. In Pauline parlance, Paul’s designation for the risen Jesus is ku,rioj. Here we encounter an explicit reference of

214

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

hymns, in addition to psalms, and spiritual songs, being sung to the risen Jesus.580 Delling comments: “In Eph. 5:19 praise is directed primarily to the ku,rioj, so that we have a hymn to Christ.”581 What can be deduced from this is that the Pauline communities did incorporate the risen Jesus within their hymnic or singing features of worship.582 The horizontal dimension of worship is seen in the fact that these psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs, are to be sung e`autoi/j / “among yourselves,”583 but it must also proceed from their hearts. The reference to singing and making melody in the heart to the Lord is an important one. I noted above that in 2 Tim 2:22 a requirement for a true worshipper was that he or she would call on the Lord from a pure heart.584 Here we observe that the act of singing and making melody is also to proceed from the heart of the believer to the Lord. In other words, anyone can sing a hymn as noted above, but if it does not proceed from the heart with the proper intent, the implication is, that it is not duly offered to the Lord. Bruce thus comments: “The voice must express the praise of the heart if the singing is to be really addressed to God.”585Aune also notes that: “such songs are not merely mechanical liturgical practices but are meant to express the inner devotion of the worshipper.”586 Hymns must be motivated and infused with religious significance by the worshipper. In a worship context they function as vehicles where the Lord Jesus in this case is addressed in song. The reference to singing and making melody in the heart thus has a qualifying aspect to it which shows that worship has to be genuine and authentic in order for it to be accepted by the Lord. Philo says something similar to this when he addresses the use of hymns in worship: ouvde. ga.r su,mpaj o` ko,smoj i`ero.n avxio,crewn a'n ge,noitogi,nomai pro.j th.n tou,tou timh,n( avlla. diV evpai,nwn kai. u[mnwn( ouvc ou]j h` gegwno.j a;|setaia;|dw fwnh,( avlla. ou]j o` aveidh.j kai. kaqarw,tatoj nou/snou/j evphch,sei kai. avname,lyei / “for the whole world could not be a temple worthy to be raised to his honor, except by means of praises and hymns, and those too must be such as are sung, not by loud voices, but by the invisible and pure mind, which shall raise the shout and song to him.”587 Philo shows here that God is truly honored (timh,n) not by the temple, but by “means of praises and hymns [u[mnwn].” These hymns must not be sung by “loud voices” or externally in an attempt for one to gain attention or notoriety, but rather by internal means in the “invisible and pure mind,” by which the song is raised up or offered to God. While Philo mentions the mind instead of the heart as Eph 5:19 does, the focus is the same. The intention of singing a hymn should be genuine and authentic, coming from the heart and directed to the Lord. Philo also notes that the use of praises and hymns are agentival, hence his use of dia, with the genitive: they are vehicles or levels of action through which God is honored. In the case of Eph 5:19, it is the risen Lord Jesus who is honored in song. I also note the possibility that both audible and inaudible aspects of singing in worship may be presented here. Communal singing in worship is expressed

PRACTICAL EXPRESSIONS OF WORSHIP IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

| 215

audibly to the edification of others as Paul argued should be its goal (1  Cor 14:26), while private singing in the heart is inaudible and presumably heard only by the Lord.588 The text however, may be presenting a parallel that the songs which are sung communally are expressed from the heart of the believers. The context of Eph 5:19 is a religious one because the words involved denote songs that have a religious orientation. I have noted that the word yalmo,j is defined as “a song of praise,”589 the word u[mnoj is “a song with religious content,”590 and the compound term wv|dai/j pneumatikai/j  / “spiritual songs” denotes songs that are “derived from or being about the Spirit [of God]” and which include “religious songs.”591 Louw and Nida make the important observation that “[i] t is also possible that in Eph 5.19 pneumatikai/j means merely ‘spiritual,’ and as such pertains to what is ‘sacred’ or ‘religious.’ One can, therefore, translate w|vdai/j pneumatikai/j as ‘songs used in worship’ or ‘songs used in worship of God.’”592 Since w|vdai/j pneumatikai/j denotes a sacred or religious song as Louw and Nida have shown, then we can conclude as Louw and Nida have, that this compound term communicates an aspect of worship together with the other words in Eph 5:19, all of which as we have seen contain a religious meaning. It can concluded then that based on my criteria, we do have worship being expressed by way of singing which becomes the level of action whereby the worshipper(s) renders honor to the risen Lord Jesus. By way of a parallel textual comparison with Col 3:16, which we will examine next, I note that the language of Col 3:16 closely resembles Eph 5:19, and the referent in the case of the former as we shall see is God making the worship context firm. We see in this text that there is an emphasis on the vocal aspect of worship through the level of action of singing which is expressed by way of psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs. This act of singing has both a vertical and horizontal dimension. These words contain a religious content and therefore they denote worship. That these words represent the three most important LXX terms for the religious song to YHWH in the OT, as Hengel has noted, further reinforces their religious connotations which indicate worship. In this case, it is the risen Lord Jesus who receives worship through the level of action of singing. I noted above that Paul made a unique contribution by introducing and including the risen Jesus within the worship of the Christian community. We observe that this inclusion of the risen Jesus continued as we see in Eph 5:19. This in itself is significant in that, as Hurtado has argued, there is no precedence for this in Judaism at all, which always had God as the object of hymnody.593 Hurtado notes rather that “singing / chanting (the singing was probably unaccompanied) in honor of Jesus was a very characteristic feature of early Christian worship.”594 In the Pauline corpus however, the only reference to singing to the risen Jesus is Eph 5:19 where he is clearly the object of the hymn.

216

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

5.6.3. Colossians 3:16 yalmoi/j u[mnoij wv|dai/j pneumatikai/j evn ca,riti a;|dontej evn tai/j kardi,aij u`mw/n tw/| qew/| / “singing psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs with grace in your hearts to God.”

The practice of singing hymns to God (tw/| qew) is attested in Col 3:16.595 In this regard Col 3:16 seems to be in agreement with 1  Cor 14:26 where the implied object seems to be God whereas in Col 3:16 God is explicitly the object of the hymns, including psalms and spiritual songs. Whereas 1 Cor 14:26 refers to the use of a yalmo,j / “psalm” in the singular, the text of Col 3:16 mentions the use of yalmoi/j / “psalms” in the plural. Colossians 3:16 like Eph 5:19 in addition to mentioning psalms also mentions u[mnoij wv|dai/j pneumatikai/j  / “hymns, and spiritual songs.” In this text, Paul also speaks of a series of nouns, yalmoi/j u[mnoij wv|dai/j pneumatikai/j, and the object of these nouns as noted is clearly identified as God (tw/| qew). This text also goes beyond 1 Cor 14:26 in mentioning in addition to “psalms,” hymns (u[mnoij) but also spiritual songs (wv|dai/j pneumatikai/j). That worship is intended in Col 3:16 is seen in the definition of the words employed, which are the same words which appear in Eph 5:19 and which carry the same meanings of religious content thereby denoting worship. The strongest indication that worship is clearly intended is the object to whom these songs are directed, namely, God. This again coheres with my criteria that when there is personal relational religious act between a human and a deity, then worship occurs. What we can deduce from this text is that the practice of expressing worship to God in song already endorsed by Paul in 1 Cor 14:26, was continued and expanded in Eph 5:19 and Col 3:16. When we compare Col 3:16 with Eph 5:19, we note some similarities but also an interesting contrast in respect to the referent or object of the psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs.596 Colossians 3:16 yalmoi/j u[mnoij wv|dai/j pneumatikai/j a;|dontej evn tai/j kardi,aij u`mw/n tw/| qew

Ephesians 5:19 yalmoi/j kai. u[mnoij kai. wv|dai/j pneumatikai/j a;|dontej . . . th/| kardi,a| u`mw/n tw/| kuri,w|

While grammatically the language and syntax stand in striking parallel, the referents are qeo,j and ku,rioj respectively. Both the referents are presented in the dative tw/| qew / tw/| kuri,w|. Here we encounter the two divine titles of the deity in the LXX (Deut 6:4), and it is these same two titles that Paul employs in his definition of the “Christian” Shema in 1 Cor 8:6 in his assertion that there is only one qeo,j who is the Father, and one ku,rioj who is the risen Lord Jesus. What these

PRACTICAL EXPRESSIONS OF WORSHIP IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

| 217

two passages above suggest is that worship was expressed in psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs to both God and the risen Jesus.597 In conclusion, in the examination above of the use of a psalm or song in Paul I noted that God is the implied referent who is acknowledged and therefore honored. The singing of such songs occurs in the worshipping community as we saw in 1 Cor 14:26 and therefore grounds it in a worship context. The association of singing a song within a worship context appears to be further established in that Paul mentions the singing of a song within a section of his letter where he deals with the gathering of the faith community and the practical expressions that occur in their worship assemblies (1 Cor 10–14). The singing of songs is only one feature of worship as Paul lists it along with teaching, revelation, tongues, and interpretation of tongues, all of which together with singing is meant to edify or build up the faith community. A song or hymn is not worship itself, but it functions as a vehicle or level of action whereby worship is expressed vocally by the faith communally and takes on a communicative aspect in that God or the risen Jesus are the implied referents. In this respect a song or a hymn functions as a subset of worship. The use of song in psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs are expanded further in Eph 5:19 and Col 3:16. Ephesians 5:19 and Col 3:16 while grammatically similar differ in respect to the referent or object who receives the level of action, in the former case it is the risen Lord Jesus; in the latter, it is God. This demonstrates that both God and the risen Jesus were the object of hymns. This inclusion of the risen Jesus in receiving hymns indicates a development beyond what we see in 1 Cor 14:26. Based on my criteria, I conclude that the risen Jesus also receives worship through the level of action or vehicle of singing hymns to him. The words employed are religiously infused and therefore establish a context of worship. Songs and hymns in and of themselves do not constitute worship but only do so within a worship context where they are motivated by the right intention of the worshippers, and proceed from the heart and are directed at God. They acknowledge God (or the risen Jesus) and serve as vehicles of praise or thanksgiving, and in so doing they attribute honor to God, which is an important element in the worship paradigm.

5.7. The Substantive and Tangible Actions of Worship In dealing with the subjects of baptism and the Eucharist, I give them the terms substantive and tangible acts of worship. These two practices assume a substantive and tangible aspect in that the materials or elements employed are physical in nature. Aune refers to such practices or rituals as a “physical action on the part of the worshipper.”598 These physical actions (baptism, Eucharist) are at the same time

218

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

also visible or observable. In the case of baptism, water is used,599 in the case of the Eucharist, bread and wine are used.600 These are the two main ritual practices which employ material elements for the purposes of expressing Christian worship in Paul.601 Ralph Martin notes regarding these rites: “We admittedly know little about the way in which ceremonial and sacramental acts were performed in the New Testament Church.”602 My main concern as stated is not how these sacramental acts were performed or administered, but how they are related to worship in Paul. Neyrey comments that: “entrance and exit rituals are also part of worship, with God either blessing new members at baptism or censuring a flagrant sinner in the group. Within the worshipping group, moreover, we find ceremonies that confirm identity and membership, as well as role and status.”603 Aune similarly comments that: “[r] ituals usually involve physical action on the part of the worshipper.”604 Neyrey’s comments appear unclear and too broad as he does not precisely address how such rituals constitute worship or are part of worship. Rituals are not worship in and of themselves. Anyone can engage in such rituals with the wrong intentions without worshipping.605 Rituals may according to Neyrey confirm one’s identity with the group, but ritual and worship are not synonymous. Aune seems to capture the use of ritual when he describes them as physical actions that the worshipper employs, but this needs further elaboration. Rituals as noted can also be exercised with false intentions and in such a case the physical action in respect to worship loses its intended meaning. I noted according to my criteria that worship involves a personal relational religious act between a human subject and a divine object and that there is a level of action whereby the subject acknowledges the object. I will apply these criteria to our examination of baptism and the Eucharist. These physical actions (baptism, Eucharist) are at the same time visible, observable, and in this respect I argue they are tangible and substantive in nature. They become vehicles with which to communicate what the faith community believes are spiritual truths. They also function as markers, which serve as identity rituals. In this respect, like spiritual songs which Paul mentions in 1 Cor 14:26 along with other features (teaching, revelation, tongues, interpretation), these outward physical expressions also edify the faith community. They thus have a horizontal dimension to them in that they affirm identity markers and boundaries in the faith community. They also have a vertical dimension to them in that they also relate to God or the risen Jesus who appear as the implicit source of what these rituals are trying to convey from the top down. Another important feature about these rituals is that they are by nature communally grounded or based on the collective gathering of the faith community. Baptism and the Eucharist are always observed or celebrated communally. There does not appear to be any evidence in Paul or the NT that baptism or the Eucharist in a Christian context was ever individually observed by

PRACTICAL EXPRESSIONS OF WORSHIP IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

| 219

oneself.606 The practice of baptism and the Eucharist always seem to appear in a group context where they are communally observed. The Eucharist by its very meal context presumes a group setting and as Goppelt notes: “Thus primitive [Christian] worship took place in private houses as a gathering around tables in everyday use.”607 As we proceed in this section we will examine the issues related to the function, content, and effect that baptism and the Eucharist have on worship.

5.7.1. Baptism One of the fullest treatments that Paul’s provides regarding baptism is found in Rom 6:3–6: 3 h'' avgnoei/te o[ti o[soi evbapti,sqhmen eivj Cristo.n VIhsou/n eivj to.n qa,naton auvtou/ evbapti,sqhmen 4 suneta,fhmen

ou=n auvtw/| dia. tou/ bapti,smatoj eivj to.n qa,naton i[na w[sper hvge,rqh Cristo.j evk nekrw/n dia. th/j do,xhj tou/ patro,j ou[twj kai. h`mei/j evn kaino,thti zwh/j peripath,swmen 5 eiv ga.r su,mfutoi gego,namen tw/| o`moiw,mati tou/ qana,tou auvtou/ avlla. kai. th/j avnasta,sewj evso,meqa\6 tou/to ginw,skontej o[ti o` palaio.j h`mw/n a;nqrwpoj sunestaurw,qh i[na katarghqh/| to. sw/ma th/j a`marti,aj tou/ mhke,ti douleu,ein h`ma/j th/| a`marti,a| 3

Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus have been baptized into his death? 4 We have been buried therefore with him through baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too might walk in the newness of life. 5 For if we have been united into the likeness of his death, we shall also in the resurrection. 6 Knowing this, that our old self was crucified with him, so that the body of sin might be done away with, so that we would no longer be slaves of sin.

5.7.2. Baptism as Identification The first thing we note is that Paul equates being baptized into Christ as being baptized into his death (Rom 6:3).608 Here Paul employs a metaphor. The believer does not necessarily die in baptism in a physical sense, but he or she is described as dying with Christ by way of spiritual analogy.609 They have died to their old self (cf. 2 Cor 5:17). Here we see baptism functioning as an identity marker in that the believer in baptism is identified with Christ in his death.610 Another metaphor that Paul includes with baptism is that of the believer in baptism being identified with Christ in his burial (Rom 6:4),611 but again this is not literal but metaphorical. Paul proceeds to use a third metaphor in relation to baptism to show that as Christ was raised from the dead to a new life by the glory of the Father, so believers have been identified with him to walk in a new life on a spiritual plane (Rom 6:4). This new

220

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

life vis-à-vis baptism is often marked by calls and exhortations to ethical living. Everett Ferguson thus notes: “Baptism as a moral and religious act is closely connected with ethics. Most of the passages about baptism in the epistles are in the context of exhortations about Christian living.”612 Paul reasons that since Christian believers are united by baptism with Jesus in his death, they will also consequently be united with Jesus in the resurrection. What happened to Christ on a physical plane is applied metaphorically to the believer on a spiritual plane. In tying baptism to the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ, Paul is identifying and associating believers via baptism to Christ in his salvific work. The essence and heart of the gospel upon which believers are saved according to Paul is the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus (1 Cor 15:1–4). These are the very three points with which believers are identified with Jesus in baptism. Thus Paul presents baptism first and foremost as an identification of the believer with Jesus in his death, burial and resurrection. The idea of identity with Jesus in baptism is similarly stressed by Paul in Gal 3:27, o[soi ga.r eivj Cristo.n evbapti,sqhte Cristo.n evnedu,sasqe / “As many of you as were baptized into Christ, you have clothed yourselves with Christ.” The idea of identification in baptism in Gal 3:28 is seen in the metaphor of being clothed with Christ.613 I conclude from this that Paul saw baptism as an identity marker for the believer and worshipper, and in this regard Neyrey is correct that a ritual such as baptism does “confirm identity and membership.”614 The confirmation of identity, however, is related to the risen Jesus in his death, burial and resurrection. Paul does not say anything explicit about worship in Rom 6:3–6 in relation to baptism. He only asserts that baptism is an identity marker of the believer with Christ. In this case, baptism is not worship itself nor is it explicitly placed in a worship context in this text. It shows rather a transition or rite of passage whereby the believer has died with Christ, has been buried, and rises to new spiritual life in the present and will rise in the resurrection in the future. While Paul does not make this point explicitly clear, the text of Rom 6:10–11, which goes on further to comment on the resurrection of Jesus, may possibly suggest that the risen Jesus who is said to live to God worships God and that believers who are identified with him in resurrection via baptism are called to do the same. This may imply a call to worship via baptism. Paul writes, o] ga.r avpe,qanen th/| a`marti,a| avpe,qanen evfa,pax\ o] de. zh/| zh/| tw/| qew/| ou[twj kai. u`mei/j logi,zesqe e`autou.j ei=nai nekrou.j me.n th/| a`marti,a| zw/ntaj de. tw/| qew/| evn Cristw/| VIhsou/ / “The death he [Jesus] died, he died to sin, once for all; but the life he lives, he lives to God. So you also must consider yourselves dead to sin and alive to God in Christ Jesus” (Rom 6:10–11 NRSV). Here Paul associates the finality of the death of Jesus with that of believers; they have also died once for all to sin. Paul then goes on to state that the risen Jesus now lives but he lives to God.

PRACTICAL EXPRESSIONS OF WORSHIP IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

| 221

This is an important statement and one which generally tends to be neglected by scholars, because it indicates that the risen Jesus being alive to God, serves God by living for him, and therefore it may be suggested that there is the possibility that in this text the risen Christ also worships God. Similarly speaking, Paul calls on believers to consider themselves dead to sin, but alive to God in Christ. As the risen Jesus lives to God, so believers ought to also live to God. That Paul does have worship in mind when he uses the phrase zh/| tw/| qew/ | / zw/ntaj de. tw/| qew/| appears to be evident in Rom 6:13, mhde. parista,nete ta. me,lh u`mw/n o[pla avdiki,aj th/| a`marti,a| avlla. parasth,sate e`autou.j tw/| qew/| w`sei. evk nekrw/n zw/ntaj kai. ta. me,lh u`mw/n o[pla dikaiosu,nhj tw/| qew/ | / “No longer present your members to sin as instruments of wickedness, but present yourselves to God as those who have been brought from death to life, and present your members to God as instruments of righteousness” (NRSV). Since Jesus has been brought from death to life, believers are identified with him in the same way by metaphorical analogy, and the purpose is so that they may present (parasth,sate) themselves to God. Paul also closely associates ethical living with baptism. As Ferguson has noted, passages dealing with baptism are usually accompanied by calls for ethical conduct and living.615 We see this for instance in Paul’s preliminary remarks in Rom 6:1–2 where he discourages the misguided idea of an ongoing life of sin so that grace would increase, which leads him to remind the Roman Christians of the significance of baptism (Rom 6:3–6). Paul argues that baptism says something about who they are in the new community of faith and who they are in Christ in relation to God. It is an identity marker that reminds them of their relationship to God. They are related to the risen Jesus in terms of his death and resurrection, and baptism is the tangible practical expression of that reality. It is a formal concrete expression of who they are. I noted above that Paul uses the word pari,sthmi as well in Rom 12:1 where he calls on believers to present their bodies as living sacrifices to God, which he defines as their spiritual worship. Thus Paul associates the word pari,sthmi with the act of worship itself in presenting oneself to God. Here Paul may, as already noted, possibly be showing the risen Jesus as also alive to God and therefore presents him as a worshipper of God. I present this again only as a possibility. In Christ, believers also become alive to God and therefore present themselves to God as those who have been brought from death to life, just like Christ. If Paul draws such an analogy, then it can be plausibly suggested that baptism in this case can be implicitly related to worship because the end result is to live to and serve God.

5.7.3. Baptism as Ownership / Allegiance Another fact of baptism that appears to place it within a worship context is its connection to the confession “Jesus is Lord.” Scholars are of the conviction that the

222

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

rite of baptism involved the use of the name of Jesus.616 Paul describes believers as baptized “into Christ Jesus.”617 Most scholars are of the opinion that baptism was probably initially administered “in / into the name of Jesus,”618 and this seems to be indicated by Paul by way of implication in 1 Cor 1:13.619 This practice of baptizing in Jesus’ name is believed to have originated at a very early period in Judean Christian circles.620 The idea of being baptized in someone’s name implied that one belonged to the person so named,621 and hence if they were baptized into or in the name of Jesus, this implied that they belonged to him.622 Here I note that another feature of baptism is that it denoted ownership or possession. In the rite of baptism, a believer was affirming by being baptized in the name of Jesus, that he or she belonged to him, and was his property so to speak. If ownership was a feature of baptism, then it presupposes that one who goes through baptism is dependent on Christ the way a servant is dependent on his master. This does not mean worship necessarily, but it does imply a relationship of a servant to a master. This feature of baptism also implies a feature of allegiance in that through the rite of baptism, a believer acknowledges that he or she has become the ownership of the master they have identified themselves with. In this respect, baptism functions somewhat as a certificate of ownership. A transition or rite of passage thus takes place where one comes under the ownership of someone else, and in this respect baptism is associated with conversion. A modernday example would be that of a person who joins the military and makes vows to obey orders from his or her superiors and to serve their country. They have in effect become the ownership of the state and have dedicated themselves for a period of time in service even to the point of surrendering their lives if necessary in combat. Within the parameters of this context of baptism as ownership, there are themes of worship which do emerge. We saw that in Paul’s use of douleu,w in 1 Thess 1:9 he was evoking themes of ownership and service.623 We saw that when these themes are placed within a religious context, they take on nuances of worship in that they overlap with worship themes related to serving God. To the extent that baptism evokes the idea of ownership by God, it can imply worship in that the baptized person becomes the possession or ownership of a new master, and thus his or her allegiance in service is now to that person’s new master. At the same time this ownership involves acknowledging the new master by showing honor to him. In an implicit way, service to God, which is an element of worship as we saw in the verbs latreu,w and douleu,w, is being communicated through the vehicle of baptism.

5.7.4. Baptism and Confession / Invocation Hurtado notes that in the ancient rite of baptism, which became the principal sign of admission into the Christian community involved “the invocation of Jesus’

PRACTICAL EXPRESSIONS OF WORSHIP IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

| 223

name.”624 Oepke notes that “in baptism the name of Christ is pronounced, invoked and confessed by the one who [baptizes] or the one [baptized] . . . or both.”625 While many scholars are accustomed to making this claim and connection between baptism and invoking the risen Jesus, there is no explicit reference in Paul that makes this connection certain.626 It remains speculative at best. Bradshaw for example notes that “a profession of faith has been integral to Christian baptism since its inception.”627 This may be so, but not explicitly so stated in the Pauline letters. However, if we grant that the confession and invocation of Jesus as Lord may have been part of the rite of baptism, then we do have a clearer association of baptism with worship, and we can put forward the following points. I have already addressed the issue of the invocation of the risen Jesus in the worshipping community and will not repeat it again here.628 I briefly note that the confession “Jesus is Lord” is closely associated with invoking Jesus as Lord (Rom 10:9–14). I have already established that the invocation of the risen Jesus as Lord does denote a religious act, and thus it constitutes worship. If the act of confessing and invoking Jesus as Lord is associated and tied in to baptism, then the act of baptism does in effect become an expression, a level of action whereby worship is being rendered; but in this case it is being rendered to the Lord Jesus. Baptism in this case becomes associated with a ritual invocation of the risen Jesus.629 Hartman correctly notes that the risen Jesus is “the fundamental reference of the rite [of baptism].”630 What makes this practice of ritually invoking the risen Jesus in baptism a distinctive Christian practice, is that in Judaism, only God was invoked in conversion rituals.631 The conversion ritual of baptism is characterized by the believer’s invocation of the risen Jesus as Lord.632 David Stanley makes the observation that the creedal affirmation or invocation of Jesus in baptism was made by the neophyte himself or herself; in other words, the person receiving baptism made the creedal statement that “Jesus is Lord” or “the Lord is Jesus.”633 In this case, baptism as an entrance ritual would involve, according to Neyrey, “word and action,”634 which becomes the levels of action whereby worship is communicated according to my criteria, at least in Paul’s letters. Since the confession “Jesus is Lord” is connected to Jesus’ own resurrection (Rom 10:9), Paul also sees believers as identified with Jesus in his death, burial, and resurrection (Rom 6:3–6). We can surmise that the confession of Jesus as Lord would therefore have a close association with baptism because believers would be identified with their Lord in this rite. The confession of Jesus as Lord as already noted above also carries implications of oath or vow taking in the rite of baptism where the believer makes a vow or an oath of allegiance to Jesus as his or her Lord.635 We recall the use of sacramentum, which has “the force of a religious initiation or consecration”636 and which carried military connotations. It was the Latin word which later came to be used by Tertullian to refer to baptism, which essentially became the oath of the Christian believer metaphorically spoken of as a soldier.637

224

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

If baptism is tied into the confession of Jesus as Lord, which involves invocation of the risen Jesus according to Rom 10:9–14, and which appears in a worship context, then we have good grounds to conclude that baptism is associated with worship in the Christian community. It thus functions as a level of action or vehicle whereby worship is expressed.638 In this respect, baptism also functions as a subset of worship. Paul never calls baptism “worship,” but it is implied because of the ultimate referent that it acknowledges either God or the risen Jesus. This acknowledgment is affirmed as we have seen in terms of ownership, allegiance, confession, and invocation, particularly to the risen Jesus.

5.7.5. Eucharist In the treatment of the Eucharist, I will restrict myself mainly to the relationship it has with Christian worship.639 It is not my intent nor is it germane to the study to deal with the various theological views on the Eucharist held by Christians throughout the course of history,640 such as the relationship of the Eucharist with the Passover,641 or to the frequent observation of the Eucharist.642 Paul is our earliest written source on the Eucharist643 and its observance, including the “words of institution” used by Jesus at the Last Supper.644 The topic of the Eucharist only appears in one of Paul’s letters, namely, his first letter to the Corinthians, but it appears in two sections (1 Cor 10:14–22; 11:17–34).645 I will make some preliminary comments before addressing these sections at length. In the first section (1 Cor 10:14–22), Paul is dealing with an external problem in relation to the faith community. How does the faith community relate to food offered to idols, and how does it balance this with their worship of God? The context of this passage as noted above clearly demonstrates one of rival worship between God and the demons. Paul reminds the Corinthian believers of their relationship first and foremost with God in worship. In this first case, we have a problem and a concern with the vertical dimension of worship, that is, the worship of God. In the second section (1 Cor 11:17–34), Paul is addressing an internal problem within the faith community which results in an inappropriate celebration of the Eucharist in which the less fortunate, the poor, were discriminated against by the more affluent within the Corinthian faith community. In the second case, the problem and concern seems to be with the horizontal dimension of worship, that is, in the relationship of believers to one another. The Eucharist becomes the central or common denominator for Paul in making his argument in both cases. The Eucharist is used by Paul as a reminder of who they are and with whom they are in relationship to, first with God and secondly with one another. Taussig argues that early Christian meals were social stages where “Christian identity was elaborated.”646 Paul uses the concrete practice of the Eucharist as a tangible reminder

PRACTICAL EXPRESSIONS OF WORSHIP IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

| 225

of Christian identity. The Eucharist thus becomes an important reference point in Paul’s position on worship. In light of this point, I take issue with the position of Aune who comments that: “Paul, however, reveals very little about the relation of this sacral meal to other features of Christian worship services.”647 On the contrary, Paul actually has a considerable amount to say about the relation of the Eucharist to features of Christian worship. Paul uses the Eucharist in 1 Cor 10:14–22 as the primary tangible example and reference point as to why the Corinthians should not be engaging in activities in pagan temples such as that of consuming food offered to idols, which is tantamount to false worship for Paul because it is food offered to idols. The Eucharist is thus first appealed to by Paul to assail the most heinous sin, idolatry, which is the equivalent of false worship for Paul and to reaffirm the worship of God. Paul ushers in a contrast between two types of food or elements that can be consumed. The common denominator here is that of food described in terms of cup and table.648 He contrasts the cup and table of the Lord with the cup and table of demons (1 Cor 10:21). To eat from one as we have seen is to exclude the other (1 Cor 10:21). To share food is to establish a context of fellowship which implies a relationship.649 To eat from either one is to be associated with worship in one shape or another. Eating food offered to idols is to partake of the cup and table of demons, which in turn results in partnership with demons, which implies a relationship with demons.650 Conversely, to partake of the Eucharist, the cup and table of the Lord, is to be in fellowship or partnership with the Lord (1 Cor 10:16–17, 21). The eating of food therefore in a religious context does have associations with worship since the food is associated with the religious object or host of the meal. In the case of the idol temples, it is the idols which are in actual fact according to Paul demons. In the Eucharist, the religious object or host is the Lord Jesus. Thus as Taussig notes, “raising a cup to a person of honor at the meal one was attending encouraged a sense that one and the honored person belonged together, that the respective identities reinforced each other.”651 The use of the cup, particularly in the context of oblations in the Greco-Roman world, also carried, according to Taussig, the notion of a powerful identity marker which also made a firm assertion of social identity.652 This would make partaking of the cup of the Lord a significant and strong claim to identity. The idea of eating a sacred meal in the context of worship appears to be rooted in the OT, in the ancient Near East,653 and Greco-Roman religion. At certain commemorative events, the people of Israel, or the priests, were to eat before YHWH, “eat before the Lord” or “eat there in the presence of the Lord.” This act was seen as an expression of worship (Deut 12:7, 18; 14:26; 15:20; Ezek 44:3).654 The idea conveyed in these meals in the OT is that YHWH is present with his people, thus implying a relational context which would include the notion of worship.655 Philo

226

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

wrote that God was the host of the meals of sacrificial meat in the temple,656 thus showing the worship dimension in the religious use of food. In Greco-Roman religion, meals would be held in honor of such gods as Asclepius, Sarapis, and Isis.657 Paul sees the worshipping community as God’s people who eat and drink from the Lord’s Table and cup and as such, they forge their allegiance to the Lord by their participation at his table. Here we note again the criteria that I have used in the definition of worship. The subject in this case are Christian believers, the medium or level of action whereby they express their honor and acknowledgment is the Eucharist or sacred meal, and the object in this case is the risen Lord Jesus in whose honor they partake of the meal. In partaking of the table and cup of demons, Christian believers associate with the demons and in effect enter into a relationship / fellowship with them, which Paul vehemently prohibits, because it results in a betrayal of allegiance to the Lord. Paul understands that food in and of itself is nothing, but when it is offered in a religious context to idols, it does constitute worship according to my criteria because the very action of offering or sacrifice is a level of action denoting worship (1 Cor 10:19–20). Thus similarly the Eucharist as food when used in a religious context does carry with it associations with worship as well because it refers to the body and blood of Jesus and is held in memory of him who is the true host of the meal.658 Partaking of the Eucharist for Paul thus becomes a powerfully tangible and visible affirmation of a sharing in the body and blood of Christ (1 Cor 10:16) as well as serving a polemical lesson for the wayward Corinthians. The Eucharist also represents unity in the worshipping community (1 Cor 10:17): they are one in Christ (cf. Gal 3:28) and thus their loyalty to God cannot be divided. As in the case of baptism which served as an identity marker for Christian believers, the Eucharist also served as a “distinctive identity marker” and a “boundary marker,” which was presumably not open to unbelievers.659 The “table” from which Christian believers ate became a term Paul also used to refer to the Eucharist and which represented according to Smith, “membership in a group” and “the ultimate expression of social bonding.”660 Taussig also notes that Christian participation at a meal “carried significant social coding, identity formation, and meaning making.”661 This involved not only identification with other members of the group but also the host of the meal. This suggests that to partake of the Eucharist, one must be identified with the host of the meal, namely, the risen Jesus. The Eucharist appears to function in two ways. It affirms who is “in” and who is “out,” and in this respect the Eucharist does double duty. It affirms what and who the group is on the one hand, and it affirms what and who the group is not on the other. The Eucharist in the words of Taussig “acted as barriers and cement to the dining relationship.”662 Food in this case unifies but also differentiates.663 The Eucharist by extension also shows who Christian believers worship

PRACTICAL EXPRESSIONS OF WORSHIP IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

| 227

and who they do not worship. Paul shows by means of the concrete expression of the Eucharist that what Christians partake of in a religious context is associated with what they worship. Conversely, Christians are not to worship the demons by partaking of their table and cup. The reason Paul raises the issue of worship in his treatment of the Eucharist is because as Smith has shown, in the Greco-Roman world of Paul and his faith communities, “worship took place at the community table.”664 It is thus natural to see Paul connecting worship themes with the community table. I already argued in the case of baptism that one of its functions was to show one’s identification with Christ. The Eucharist appears to play a similar role. By partaking of the body and blood of Christ was to join oneself to him. While it is not clearly stated by Paul as Dunn admits, the Eucharist was a meal shared only by baptized believers.665 If this was the case, then there is an implicit relationship between baptism and the Eucharist. It should be noted that the object or referent in both baptism and the Eucharist is the risen Jesus. The Eucharist, like baptism, also communicates the notion of ownership and identity marker. The second reference Paul makes to the Eucharist has the poor and the marginalized of the faith community in mind (1 Cor 11:17–34). Paul deals with an internal issue at this point and with what I term the horizontal dimension in worship. This can be seen in Paul’s call for the more wealthier members of the Corinthian church to be considerate and understanding of their brothers and sisters who may be disadvantaged and easily subject to discrimination and marginalization.666 When the horizontal dimension in worship is warped, the vertical dimension between the worshipper and God also becomes warped.667 These two must be kept in balance. Love for God should be reflected in love for his people. This is seen in the fact that Paul refuses to commend such abuses, but he warns that due to these abuses the Lord will judge those in the faith community (some are weak, sick, and some have died; 1 Cor 11:30). This reference to the judgment of the Lord reinforces the religious nature of the Eucharistic meal and implies that the Lord is present with the faith community and is aware of their actions (cf. 1 Cor 5:4). Paul had warned in his first section on the Eucharist not to provoke the Lord to jealousy with the implication that there would be judgment (1 Cor 10:22). The Lord here again is the risen Jesus. The religious nature of the Eucharist is also seen in the warning against those who eat and drink the bread and cup corresponding to the body and blood of Christ in an unworthy manner, which results in eating and drinking judgment on themselves (1 Cor 11:27–29). The subject who brings this judgment is the Lord Jesus (1 Cor 11:32), which reinforces the presence of the risen Jesus during the Eucharist (cf. 1 Cor 5:4). If the Lord Jesus is present in the faith community, then the implication is that he should be honored and respected. The behavior of some in the church, however, towards others of lesser means is what is provoking Paul to

228

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

warn them against incurring the judgment of the Lord. Paul later reminds them in metaphorical language that they are collectively the body of Christ and that every member is an equal and vital for the function of the whole (1 Cor 12:12–30).668 That the Eucharist is contextualized within Christian worship is evident from Paul’s language of the coming together of the corporate faith community with the intent and purpose of celebrating the Eucharist, which is to be done in memory of Christ. Paul uses the verb sune,rcomai669 / “when you come together ” (1 Cor 11:17–18, 20, 33–34).670 The importance of the horizontal dimension of the Eucharist can be seen in its close association with the ’Aga,ph feast, which according to Stauffer was “a technical term for the fraternal love-feast which develops out of the beginnings of table fellowship and finds significant outworking even in a social sense.”671 Louw and Nida describe it as “a special type of communal meal having particular significance for early Christians as an expression of their mutual affection and concern—‘fellowship meal.’”672 Paul makes no explicit reference to this love feast by name in his letters. It is believed that the ’Aga,ph or love feast and Eucharist were one event in the Pauline faith communities and that it is inferred in 1 Cor 11:17–34, particularly with reference to the abuses of the sacred meal that Paul addresses.673 This love feast in the faith community would have also involved a mixed company of men and women together. This appears to reflect Paul’s statement that in Christ there is no male or female (Gal 3:28). Paul also uses family language to speak of the relationship that faith community has with God (Gal 3:26). The unity of the faith community is seen in Paul’s reference to the bread that is broken in the Eucharistic celebration of the faith community (kla,w; 1 Cor 10:16; cf. Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7; 27:35). The one bread is representative of the unity of the faith community (1 Cor 10:17) so that we have plurality in unity.674 Paul also makes reference to Jesus breaking (kla,w) the bread at the Last Supper (1 Cor 11:23–24). What appears central to Paul is that their fellowship which was a mutual one, involved eating together, and in the Eucharist they were affirming their identity and their relationship first to God and the risen Jesus and then to each other. The sharing of this communal meal was also intimately connected with worship. BDAG notes that this was “a common meal eaten by early Christians in connection with their worship, for the purpose of fostering and expressing mutual affection and concern.”675 The mutual affection underscores the horizontal dimension of the ’Aga,ph, but BDAG also notes that this love feast was also connected to worship, although BDAG does not clarify this point. The worship aspect is seen in the religious nature of the Eucharist, which was a religious meal, and therefore it was associated with worship. Through this religious meal, they enter into a partnership or fellowship with the risen Lord Jesus in which they honor him as the host of the meal.

PRACTICAL EXPRESSIONS OF WORSHIP IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

| 229

One of the most neglected points regarding the study of the Eucharist is the description Paul gives of Jesus when he recounts the Last Supper (1 Cor 11:23–24). In retelling the story of the Last Supper, Paul notes that Jesus took the bread and cup and gave “thanks” (euvcaristh,saj; 1 Cor 11:24). The implied referent to whom Jesus gives thanks is God.676 What we observe here in this account is a picture of worship according to my criteria, but it is one which involves Jesus as the subject who worships. Here we see Jesus as the subject and God as the implied object. The level of action on the part of Jesus is that he gives “thanks” to God for the bread and the cup. This is clearly a worship scene. God is the implied object, and the giving of thanks at a meal was a recognized religious action within Judaism.677 The giving of thanks also implies a dependence or a measure of debt of one person on the other, and here we see Jesus dependent on God for his provision. The retelling of this account of Jesus by Paul immediately roots the Eucharist within a framework of worship because the first Eucharist was set within a context of worship itself with Jesus. Therefore, whenever believers celebrate the Eucharist, they are reliving, reenacting, and remembering the words and acts of Jesus, which involved his level of action of giving thanks to God. Aune comments that in the Eucharist the “ritual repetition of a sacred event of the past serves to reactualize the event in the imagination of those present.”678 Jesus remains the unseen host at this meal in the Pauline worshipping communities. Similarly, when the Eucharist is celebrated in the faith community, the giving of thanks to God is repeated. Through the Eucharist, the faith community is exercising a level of action whereby they worship God by giving thanks the way Jesus did. In this respect, we have the imitatio Christi where Christian believers imitate Jesus in the first Eucharist. Paul is showing a direct continuity between Jesus hosting the Eucharist and giving thanks, and Christians participating in the Eucharist and also giving thanks as Jesus did. In this respect, they are identifying with Jesus.679 While the Eucharist has elements of worship to God in it as we have seen, it also came to be about Jesus, particularly by the focus being on his death and secondly and implicitly his resurrection and also the hope of the parousia (1 Cor 11:26).680 Paul says that in the Eucharist believers declare or proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes. In this respect, the Eucharist is declarative in nature, it says something about what Christians believe about Jesus. In this respect, the Eucharist is like baptism, which involved as many scholars believe a declarative aspect where Jesus was confessed to be Lord and who was invoked. Paul does not mention the confession of Jesus as Lord in the Eucharist, although when he refers to the risen Jesus he refers to him as ku,rioj / “the Lord” (1 Cor 11:23, 26–27, 32). It is uncertain whether there was an invocation of the risen Jesus in the Eucharist as far as Paul’s treatment of the Eucharist goes. Some scholars have suggested that the maranatha prayer to the risen Jesus in 1 Cor 16:22 was related to the Eucharist.

230

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

This however, is highly speculative in Paul and not altogether certain as Paul does not make that connection. Such a connection was made later in the patrisitc writings.681 Fitzmyer has rightly cautioned against the temptation to make a connection between the maranatha prayer of 1 Cor 16:22 with the Eucharist based on later Patristic writings.682 The Eucharist is also about remembering Jesus in terms of his sacrificial death (his body and blood), eating and drinking in “remembrance of me” (1 Cor 11:24– 25). The theme of “remembrance” is an important one within the worship context of Judaism, and the same seems to be the case in the early Christian community.683 This does not necessarily mean worship is taking place, but Paul has implicitly argued that to partake of a religious meal is to associate oneself with the host of the religious meal, and as such one is associating with worship in religious meals. N. T. Wright comments that: “[b]aptism and eucharist thus both draw the eye up to the most striking feature of the life of the early [Christian] community: the worship of Jesus.”684 I have argued above that if confessing and invoking the risen Jesus as Lord was associated with baptism, then we do have an example of worship being rendered to the risen Jesus. However, in our examination of the Eucharist we do not seem to find any explicit reference to the risen Jesus being invoked, and even though the maranatha prayer to the risen Jesus (1 Cor 16:22) has been cited as evidence for this, there are no grounds for asserting that Paul made such a connection. While Wright is correct that the worship of Jesus appears to be granted in the case of baptism, he may be too hasty in connecting it to the Eucharist. The association through the Eucharist with the risen Jesus establishes a fellowship with him, but it also incorporates God as the object of thanksgiving. One feature of the Eucharist as opposed to baptism is that it is an on-going rite, and Paul implies that it is to continue until the Lord returns (1 Cor 11:26). In summary, both baptism and the Eucharist function as tangible and substantive expressions of worship in the Christian community. They are concrete vehicles that serve as visible pictorial expressions of the allegiance and identification of the believer with Christ. In baptism and the Eucharist, Christian believers are engaging in acts that recognize, acknowledge, and honor God or the risen Jesus, and in this respect there is overlap with worship. Both baptism and the Eucharist are Christocentric in that they are at their basic level oriented around Jesus and his death and resurrection. The practice of baptism and the Eucharist thus draws and includes the risen Jesus in a worship context where these tangible expressions are exercised. Their use in a religious context firmly places them within a worship context. They are never called “worship” by Paul but are associated with worship. They function as outward expressions and as vehicles where worship is expressed. In the examination of the language of worship, we saw that the word qrhskei,a was a word that had to do with the external aspects of religious devotion. This word

PRACTICAL EXPRESSIONS OF WORSHIP IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

| 231

demonstrates that one aspect of worship is to show one’s allegiance by external practices. While Paul does not apply qrhskei,a to baptism or the Eucharist, it seems to be the case that both baptism and the Eucharist function as external aspects of religious devotion. They both occur in a communal context which is religious, and therefore a worship context is established. Both of these physical acts appear to be Christocentric in that the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus including his parousia are communicated or declared in their administration. Baptism and the Eucharist also communicate the notion of identity with the risen Jesus. In baptism, believers are identified with Jesus in his death, burial, and resurrection. They have put on or clothed themselves with Christ (cf. Gal 3:27). In the Eucharist, they are identified with him by means of participating in the consumption of the tangible elements of the bread and cup corresponding to the body and blood of Christ. I also noted how a number of scholars are persuaded that the confession “Jesus is Lord” was a baptismal confession. I have argued that this is not altogether clear in Paul. In confessing Jesus as Lord, the believer was also invoking the risen Jesus as Rom 10:19–14 seems to clearly bear out. If invocation to the risen Jesus was related to baptism, then we have good grounds for affirming that in the rite of baptism the risen Jesus was addressed in invocatory prayer, and hence worship was attributed to the risen Jesus. Baptism thus contains elements of worship in that the risen Jesus is the implied referent who is acknowledged and therefore honored. When Paul deals with the Eucharist, it first appears in a section dealing with an external problem in which Paul is repudiating idolatry among the Corinthians, which is antithetical to the worship of God (1 Cor 10:14–22).This immediately places the Eucharist within the context of worship as Paul uses it polemically to discountenance and thereby repudiate idolatry. Paul uses the Eucharist as a tangible example of the fellowship which believers have with the risen Jesus and that that fellowship cannot be compromised with idols, which are mere props for demons according to Paul. In the second reference to the Eucharist (1  Cor 11:17–29), Paul addresses an internal problem with the worshipping community. Partiality is being practiced where the more affluent in the Christian faith community are discriminating against the poor ones. Paul calls for an end to this as this has a counterproductive effect on their relationship with the risen Lord. By discriminating against the poor they are in effect dishonoring these guests of the host who is the Lord Jesus. The language Paul uses for assembling to observe the Eucharist, we noted, is a phrase that denotes gathering for worship or for a religious purpose. In this respect, the Eucharist is placed within a context of worship. In recounting the Eucharistic words of Jesus, Paul not only shows the continuity of the act of Jesus with the faith community, he also presents Jesus in the capacity of a worshipper of God in that in the meal with his disciples Jesus gave “thanks” to God. The Eucharist

232

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

therefore becomes a reenactment of the meal Jesus had with his disciples in which the celebrating faith community in the present gives “thanks” to God as Jesus did. The Eucharist thus becomes a commemorative act in recalling the death of Jesus, and I noted parallels to the OT theme of remembering YHWH in sacred meals. Baptism and the Eucharist are not worship in and of themselves, but rather, they function as tangible expressions, vehicles, or levels of action in which worship is expressed. Baptism and the Eucharist function as a subset of worship. Based on my proposed criteria we can conclude that within the rites of baptism and the Eucharist worship occurs.

CHAPTER SIX

The Purpose and Ultimate Goal of Worship in Paul

6.1. Preliminary Remarks Paul as we have seen viewed worship as a relationship between the human subject, either individually or collectively with others, and the divine object: God. We saw that at several points in his letters Paul also included the risen Jesus within the worship context of the faith community, particularly in the area of invocation, prayer, including his wish prayers in his epistolary salutations. We also saw the use of hymns, psalms, and spiritual songs being sung to the risen Jesus, although this only appears in Eph 5:19.1 In this chapter, I seek to investigate what Paul perceived to be the Zielangabe, the purpose and the ultimate goal of worship. What is the end purpose of worship, and what is achieved ultimately in worship according to Paul? In order to examine these questions, we turn to an important passage which many scholars believe was rooted in the worship environment of the early Christian movement, namely, the Carmen Christi (Phil 2:6–11). I deal with the Carmen Christ because of its climatic point which ends with the glory of God. The Carmen Christi also appears to contain some overlap with what we have examined in this book, particularly the place of the risen Jesus in Christian worship, the expressions of bowing the knee, and confession. Most importantly the Carmen presents a trajectory that begins with Jesus and ends with Jesus as the penultimate referent, but ultimately has God as the final object. All the details of the Carmen

234

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

ultimately end with God, and in this respect there is a teleological aspect to the Carmen which is related in some way to worship. Martin notes that the Carmen “represents a type of literature which New Testament study has detected and classified as ‘cultic’ or ‘confessional’.”2 It is my intention to probe the cultic aspect of the Carmen at a deeper level.

6.2. The Carmen Christi (Phil 2:6–11) While there have been many scholarly approaches to the Carmen Christi, there has been very little if any approaches to the Carmen from the standpoint of worship. Most approaches and studies of the Carmen seem to concern themselves with the origin of the Carmen, whether it is Pauline or pre-Pauline,3 the hymnic structure4 of the Carmen, the ethical nature of the Carmen for the Philippian Christians to imitate, and the Christology of the Carmen. While all these approaches are valid and helpful to a certain degree, I feel approaching the Carmen from the perspective of worship has not been thoroughly treated. It is not my intent to supply an exhaustive analysis of the Carmen Christi in this study.5 I wish to focus for the purposes of our study on mainly the last three verses (Phil 2:9–11) which I feel are germane to the subject of worship. Before doing so I will briefly comment on the beginning verses of the Carmen and then focus our attention on Phil 2:9–11. In the following citation of the Carmen, I place in bold lettering the pertinent verses for this study.

6.2.1. Philippians 2:6–11 6 o]j

evn morfh/| qeou/ u`pa,rcwn ouvc a`rpagmo.n h`gh,sato to. ei=nai i;sa qew/| 7 avlla. e`auto.n evke,nwsen morfh.n dou,lou labw,n evn o`moiw,mati avnqrw,pwn geno,menoj\ kai. sch,mati eu`reqei.j w`j a;nqrwpoj 8 evtapei,nwsen e`auto.n geno,menoj u`ph,kooj me,cri qana,tou qana,tou de. staurou/ 9 dio. kai. o` qeo.j auvto.n u`peru,ywsen kai. evcari,sato auvtw/| to. o;noma to. u`pe.r pa/n o;noma 10 i[na evn tw/| ovno,mati VIhsou/ pa/n go,nu ka,myh| evpourani,wn kai. evpigei,wn kai. katacqoni,wn 11 kai. pa/sa glw/ssa evxomologh,shtai o[ti ku,rioj VIhsou/j Cristo.j eivj do,xan qeou/ patro,j. 6

Who being in the form of God did not regard equality with God something to be grasped 7 but emptied himself, taking on the form of a slave, and being made in the likeness of men; and being found in appearance as a human 8 he humbled himself, becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. 9 Therefore, God highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name which is above every name 10 in order that, at the name of Jesus every knee should bow in heaven, and on earth, and under the earth 11 and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

THE PURPOSE AND ULTIMATE GOAL OF WORSHIP IN PAUL

| 235

6.2.2. An Exegetical-Theological Analysis of the Carmen Christi The Carmen is divided into two parts: part 1 (Phil 2:6–8), and part 2 (Phil 2:9–11).6 Some scholars believe Paul wrote the Carmen for the purposes of encouraging Christian unity by urging reciprocal respect and consideration for one another.7 In the Carmen there is a discernible movement where the preexistent Jesus descends from his prestigious position “in the form of God” (2:6),8 which stands in parallel to the following phrase, being i;sa qew / “equal with God,”9 and enters into the lowest of estates expressed in his taking on the “form of a slave / servant” and being “man” (2:7–8).10 In this state, he submits himself fully to God, which is then followed by an ascent to the loftiest estate where he is highly exalted by God (2:9–11). In the first part of the Carmen (2:6–8) the action such as he poured / emptied himself and he humbled himself are all undertaken by Jesus.11 They are further modified by another participle indicating how Jesus volitionally carried out what was said about him in the main verb (“taking on the form of a slave”; “becoming obedient unto death”).12 The utter extent of Jesus’ obedience is that of death on the cross.13 The reference to Jesus’ complete obedience to death on a cross presents his lowest condescension to the very bottom of the barrel so to speak.14 In referring to the ignominious death of Jesus on the cross, Paul has reached the limit of the downward climax of the descent of Jesus.15 The descent is seen in 2:6–8. This humiliation on the part of Jesus in 2:8 sets the stage for the sharp contrast Paul will introduce in 2:9 with the exaltation of Jesus.16 A decisive change in emphasis occurs in the Carmen at this point.17 We turn now to the verses which are pertinent to our study in Phil 2:9–11.

6.2.3. The Climax of the Carmen and Worship (Phil 2:9–11) Philippians 2:9–11 forms the climax or ascent of the Carmen, and it is here I seek to focus most of our attention. While Jesus is the active agent in Phil 2:6–8, God becomes the active agent in Phil 2:9–11, and Jesus is the passive object.18 Paul uses the inferential conjunction dio. kai which is a Pauline connecting phrase19 to string together the previous narrative of Jesus’ humiliation and suffering the shameful death of the cross, to his subsequent exaltation by God. The inferential conjunction dio. kai functions to indicate the reason for why Jesus went from the status or transition of utter humility to utter exaltation.20 Literally, it states God “hyperexalted him.”21 Fee notes the verb u`peru,ywsen is used to “magnify or express excess, not position”22 and that what is emphasized is not a comparative degree, but a superlative degree.23 The reference to Jesus’ exaltation carries with it the notion of honor. Louw and Nida state that the verb u`peruyo,w means “to regard a person as being exceptionally

236

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

honored in view of high status – ‘to give exceptional honor,’” and they render Phil 2:9a as “therefore God gave him exceptional honor.”24 Neyrey has shown that in texts addressing the honor and praise of God, references to height are made in order to emphasize the distance between God and the human.25 We should recall Neyrey’s comments that “[a]ncient monarchs were notorious for limiting and denying access to their presence as a mark of worth and high status; hence the more inaccessible, the more honorable.”26 The distance between the human subject and the divine object is meant to heighten the distinctiveness between the two (cf. Isa 6:1). If Jesus has been given exceptional honor by God, then that honor is to be acknowledged and rendered to him, which seems to be the theme of the following verses. Paul’s reference to the exaltation of Jesus may also be a possible counter imperial theme according to some scholars as Paul takes the titles of the emperor such as “lord” and “savior” and applies them to Jesus.27 Some of the Roman emperors claimed to be exalted to heaven.28 Paul refers to Jesus as “savior” in his letter to the Philippians (Phil 3:20), and it is possible that its appearance here is deliberate for polemical purposes.29 These are titles that when applied to divine entities imply the notion of worship. The emperor Augustus for example, as I noted according to Virgil, was considered “a god” worthy to receive sacrifice.30 Greco-Roman regal inscriptions reveal that Roman emperors assumed the title “Lord” to themselves and used it in a divine context to elicit worship and adoration from their subjects.31 Philippi was known to be very pro-Empire and had a long history of emperor devotion.32 The emperor Caligula (37 CE–41 CE), who reigned in Paul’s day, desired worship as ku,rioj and attempted to place his idol in the Jerusalem temple.33 On an immediate polemical level, Paul attributes to the exalted Jesus at the climatic end of the Carmen one of the titles by which the emperor was known, namely, ku,rioj.34 I also suggest that in addition to a possible polemical counter imperial thrust by Paul in the Carmen, the reference to the exaltation of Jesus may also probably be rooted in the exaltation language of the OT especially as it relates to the exaltation of God over the cosmos and nations.35 The exaltation of Jesus by God therefore carries with it connotations of honor. The NLT renders Phil 2:9a as “God elevated him to the place of highest honor.” It should be noted that this exaltation is accomplished by God in response to Jesus’ obedience in death (2:8), but the exaltation of Jesus also has an intended purpose as we shall see. Paul also states that in conjunction with highly exalting Jesus, God also gave him or graced him by giving him “the name which is above every name.”36 Thurston and Ryan note that “[t]o give a name is to bestow status, authority, even power.”37 I would also add to this that the giving of a name in addition to granting authority and power would also convey the bestowal of honor,38 which has already been established in the exaltation of Jesus by God as we saw above. While there

THE PURPOSE AND ULTIMATE GOAL OF WORSHIP IN PAUL

| 237

has been some debate by scholars as to what exactly that name is, most scholars tend to see this name as a reference to the tetragrammaton YHWH or its LXX equivalent ku,rioj.39 Fuller notes that the language used here suggests that God has transferred his own name to the exalted Christ.40 The expression to. o;noma appears to be the Greek equivalent of the Hebrew expression ~veh; which functions as a “periphrasis for Yahweh.”41 The name of YHWH (LXX; ku,rioj) is described in the OT as being the name which is exalted above everything else (Ps 8:1; 138:2; 148:13). The idea of honor is also associated with a person’s name depending on one’s identity. Thus the name of God is associated with honor (Mal 2:2; cf. 1:6). In conferring the divine name on Jesus, God is giving honor to him. That the divine name is in view here is further buttressed by the background of Phil 2:9–11, which appears to be alluding to Isa 45:23 where God is the subject.42 We see in Phil 2:9 that God highly exalts Jesus and gives him the divine name ku,rioj.43 Both these acts communicate the idea of honor, which the risen Jesus has been graced with by God. These acts, however, have an intentional purpose and this is indicated by the grammar which follows in 2:10, particularly with the conjunction i[na. Wallace notes that when the conjunction i[na is used with the subjunctive as we encounter in Phil 2:10–11, we have a purpose-result i[na clause which indicates “both the intention and its sure accomplishment.”44 O’Brien notes that verses 10–11 are grammatically dependent on the purpose clause of verse 9 contained in the preposition i[na.45 Paul is thus communicating that the reason why God has highly exalted Jesus and given him the divine name is with the intention and purpose of achieving a result. Before describing what that end result is, Paul indicates in 2:10–11 that the reason why God has exalted and conferred the divine name on Jesus (2:9) is so that every knee should bow (all in heaven, earth, and under the earth) and every tongue should confess that Jesus is ku,rioj / “Lord.” The idea of purpose is also expressed in the subjunctive verb ka,myh| which is “a subjunctive of purpose.”46 The reference to heaven, earth, and under the earth (the netherworld) describes the three-tiered universe of Greek cosmology.47 The bowing of the knee of all those in the three-tiered universe indicates the cosmic extent or scope of the reign or lordship of the exalted Jesus and also the level of action which is given to the exalted Jesus by his subjects, namely, bowing. This is only part of the process and not the final result or aim of the exaltation of Jesus. The falling on the knees according to Loh and Nida is “an idiomatic expression referring to reverence and worship, and sometimes prayer (Rom 11:4; cf. Eph 3:14).”48 I noted above that the word proskune,w, which Paul uses in 1 Cor 14:25, also carries the meaning of fall on one’s knees and prostration.49 Paul used this word in a worship context as we saw, but he applied it to an unbeliever who comes to recognize the presence of God in the Corinthian congregation and performs proskune,w and falls on his face. Martin points out that it also denotes “extreme abasement and submission . . . and

238

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

denotes that the universal homage marks the subjection of those who so kneel to the lordship of Christ.”50 Thurston and Ryan also note that “[i]n the Philippians’ world one bowed the knee to the emperor. The image is not that of prayer . . . but of fealty or subjugation to one’s liege,” and they further note that “[t]he overall image is that of an enthronement; Jesus is exalted, and his subjects kneel before him.”51 Loh and Nida and others, however, argue contra Thurston and Ryan that the bending of the knee as an idiomatic expression can also sometimes refer to and include prayer as well as reverence and worship.52 There is certainly an enthronement theme present here, and the idea is that of submission and surrender to the exalted Jesus expressed by the bending of the knee, but the question I would like to raise for the purposes of this study is this: is the exalted Jesus being described by Paul as receiving worship or mere homage that is given to a human monarch or ruler? A number of scholars have used different words to express the level of action which is being rendered to the exalted Jesus in Phil 2:10–11. Stephen Fowl asserts that the bowing of every knee “signifies the recognition of authority, and it is a way of offering homage to Jesus.”53 Is Fowl using the word “homage” in the same way as “worship” or does he mean something other than worship? Martin speaks of the “universal homage” which is given to the exalted Jesus,54 but then elsewhere Martin speaks of the exalted Jesus receiving worship.55 Conybeare and Howson state that the kneeling to the exalted Jesus is “adoration of Him.”56 O’Brien asserts that “[i]t is clear that Jesus is the one being worshipped,”57 but elsewhere O’Brien speaks of the “universal homage” given to the exalted Jesus.58 Fee on the other hand combines both the words “homage” and “worship” in reference to the exalted Jesus when he states that “the whole creation will at the end offer Christ homage and worship.”59 This seems to imply that homage and worship are distinct words from each other. This still brings us to the question as to whether or not worship takes place with reference to the exalted Jesus and why some scholars seem reticent about using the word “worship” here. Hurtado refers to the actions outlined in Phil 2:10– 11 as “devotion to Jesus,”60 and elsewhere he will speak of “the cultic veneration of the risen Jesus” and the “cultic reverence of the exalted Jesus.”61 Aune describes worship as follows: “Christian worship can be understood as the reverent homage paid to God and Christ in the context of a Christian assembly.”62 Why does Aune use “homage” here rather than “worship”? Does he intend by this that “homage” and “worship” are synonymous? Homage can be offered to a monarch or ruler, yet what distinguishes this use of “homage” with homage rendered in Aune’s words “to God and Christ”? Dunn on the other hand argues for a sharp distinction between “veneration” and “worship” when he states: “If we observe the ancient distinction between “worship” and “veneration,” we would have to speak of the veneration of Christ, meaning something short of full-scale worship.”63 Dunn however, at this

THE PURPOSE AND ULTIMATE GOAL OF WORSHIP IN PAUL

| 239

point lapses into what appears to be a semantic anachronism. How can Dunn refer to the distinction between “veneration” and “worship” as “ancient” when such a distinction was formulated over seven centuries after Paul at the Second Council of Nicea in 787 CE?64 While this distinction was made at the Second Council of Nicea, this would have no relevance to Paul’s usage of such words in the first century. Paul seems to show no awareness of the alleged distinctions between “worship” and “veneration” that Dunn supposes. This seems to insinuate that Paul had a standard word that meant “worship,” but as I have argued, Paul has no specific word for “worship” in his vocabulary. Dunn appears uncomfortable with the view that Jesus received worship.65 In his recent book Did the First Christians Worship Jesus? Dunn responds to this title question by stating: “‘Generally no’ or ‘Only occasionally’, or ‘Only with some reserve’.”66 Dunn’s responses are reserved, but one way or the other he admits that the risen Jesus was worshipped. However, at the end of his book Dunn surprisingly turns and answers the question his book raises in the negative. Dunn concludes: So our central question [whether Jesus was worshipped] can indeed be answered negatively, and perhaps it should be . . . The only one to be worshipped is the one God. But how can Christians fail to honor the one through whom it believes the only God has most fully revealed himself, the one through whom the only God has come closest to the condition of humankind? Jesus cannot fail to feature in their worship, their hymns of praise, their petitions to God. But such worship is always, should always be offered to the glory of God the Father.67

Dunn appears to be conflicted here in his wording. He denies the risen Jesus was worshipped and that only God should be worshipped. Then he refers to Christians honoring Jesus and that he features in their worship, hymns, and petitions to God. How does Jesus “feature in their worship”? As we have seen, hymns were addressed to Jesus (Eph 5:19), and petitions were also directly addressed to him both communally and individually (1  Cor 16:22; 2  Cor 12:8–10; 1  Thess 3:11–13; 2 Thess 2:16–17; 3:5). Dunn then states such worship “should always be offered to the glory of God the Father.” Dunn again is not clear. If the risen Jesus is worshipped, then such worship redounds to the glory of God, but then in this case we do have worship offered to Jesus. The ambiguity in Dunn’s assessment is due in my judgment to the lack of a proper definition of worship. This uncertainty indicates in my view that a proper working definition for worship and criteria are essential to determine according to Paul when worship is intended, and when it is not. Other scholars are more direct like Charles Cousar who goes so far as to claim that the exalted Christ is being worshipped as God68 as does Wallace who similarly states that Paul “is declaring that Jesus Christ is true deity.”69 Bauckham also speaks of the worship of Jesus here70 as do Loh and

240

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

Nida.71 Bockmuehl also states that “divine worship will be offered to Jesus as both Messiah and Lord,”72 but he also speaks of “devotion” that is given to Jesus.73 It should be noted that Phil 2:9–11 (and the rest of the Carmen) does not have any of the words Paul employs for worship in his letters which have been surveyed above such as latreu,w, latrei,a, seba,zomai, douleu,w, proskune,w, and qrhskei,a. In the absence of these words, the only way it can be determined whether worship takes place is by first defining worship, and then applying criteria to establish the use of worship, which I will address very shortly. A number of scholars, however, have rejected the idea that the exalted Jesus is an object of worship in Phil 2:10–11. Delling asserts: “Obviously it is not concerned with a worshipping of Jesus but of God which is offered ‘in the Name of Jesus’.”74 Delling thus sees the true referent of worship here as God and not the exalted Jesus. Neil Richardson likewise asserts that God is the referent of worship when he states that “‘bending the knee’ at the name of Jesus is now the new way of acknowledging that Yahweh is God” and that there is no “transfer of language from the Old Testament of God to Jesus.”75 Collins and Collins also cast doubt as to whether the honor given to the exalted Jesus in Phil 2:10–11 can truly be called worship in a religious cultic sense, or whether it should be taken as submission and respect.76 Lohmeyer likewise holds that the exalted Christ is Lord in that he receives cosmic submission rather than religious worship.77 Collins and Collins in their treatment of Phil 2:10–11 never address the relationship of this text with Isa 45:23. This undercuts in my opinion the force of what Paul is saying about the exalted Jesus in the context of worship as we shall see below. Richardson’s argument is also not convincing since it is the exalted Jesus who receives the level of action of the bending or bowing of the knee and the confessing that he is Lord. Moreover, Richardson’s dismissal of OT language being transferred to the exalted Jesus is unwarranted as it is well recognized by scholars that Paul applies with relative ease YHWH texts to Jesus as David Capes has convincingly shown in his seminal work Old Testament Yahweh Texts in Paul’s Christology. The Carmen is a text related to worship as it bears marks that are typical of a context for worship. I will examine these further below but will briefly make reference to them. The act of bowing before the exalted Christ (Phil 2:10) is one that recalls the word proskune,w, which carries the meaning of prostrating or falling on one’s knees or bending the knee. This is an act that denotes surrender and submission to a superior and when placed in a religious context takes on the meaning of worship. The act of confessing one as “Lord” (Phil 2:11) also denotes an act of submission and surrender while also denoting an acknowledgment of lordship. The act of acknowledging someone carries the idea of rendering honor to them. When these particular acts are placed within a religious context, they take on the meaning of worship. Thus Martin is correct in his assessment of the Carmen that it “represents

THE PURPOSE AND ULTIMATE GOAL OF WORSHIP IN PAUL

| 241

a type of literature which New Testament study has detected and classified as ‘cultic’.”78 The “cultic” genre of the Carmen is detectable because it contains elements of worship by way of practical expressions (bending the knee, confessing), and it ends with an ascription of glory to God. The literary source for the ending of the Carmen (Phil 2:10–11) is also believed to have its roots in a worship context derived from Isa 45:23. The difficulty again here as I have been arguing throughout this study seems to be the lack of a proper working for worship and the absence of available criteria to determine the act of worship. Delling as we have seen does not provide a proper working definition for worship nor does he provide criteria to establish when worship occurs.79 Delling takes the position that the universal bowing in Phil 2:10 is to God “in the Name of Jesus.”80 Delling’s position is based on the use of the preposition evn in Phil 2:10 as to whether it means “in” or “at” in reference to the name of Jesus. The function of this preposition is debated.81 Fowl raises the question regarding this preposition: “Does it refer to the object of worship or the medium?”82 Delling takes the latter position, but the majority of translations render Phil 2:10 “at the name of Jesus” (HCSB, KJV, NKJV, ESV, NASB, NAB, NET, NIV, NJB, NLT, NRSV, RSV), while a few render it “in the name of Jesus” (ERV, ASV, Douay-Rheims). According to O’Brien such an interpretation like that of Delling’s, which holds the use of evn in Phil 2:10 to be instrumental (“through” or “by”) with worship being directed to God the Father, is most likely improbable.83 O’Brien argues instead, “Rather, the adoration is in honour of the exalted Christ” as the following verse (Phil 2:11) also suggests.84 In other words, the exalted Jesus is the direct object of the level of action of bowing. Loh and Nida note contra Delling that the direct object of worship in Phil 2:10 is the exalted Jesus, not God.85 Even if Delling’s position were correct, it still would not disprove that the bowing of every knee is directed at the exalted Jesus, since similar grammatical wording is used in the LXX where worship “in the name of” God is worship offered to God himself (LXX 1 Kgs 8:44; Ps 44:10; 63:5; 104:3).86 The idea which seems to be implied in Phil 2:10 is that in honor of the name of Jesus every knee should bow to him as the GNT renders it.87 The worship of God as we shall see is a direct consequent of the level of action described in the bowing of every knee to the exalted Jesus. We return to the question: is worship being described in the reference to the universal bowing of the knee to the exalted Jesus? We have seen that scholars will vacillate between the words “worship” and “homage,” and some like Delling and Dunn think it difficult to conceive of Jesus being an object of worship. I suggest that the only way we can determine if worship is present with the exalted Jesus as its object is by defining worship and establishing a set criteria for worship. When we examine the criteria for worship in this book, we observed that worship involves a personal

242

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

relational religious act between a human (or spiritual) subject, either individually or collectively, and a superspiritual entity or divine object. The subject(s) is always dependent on the divine object and expresses that dependence in terms of a level of action, which can involve such acts as bowing, and others like praise, prayer, invocation, prostration, and so forth. In order for worship to take place, the context of the relationship between the human subject(s) and the divine object must be a religious one. When we examine Phil 2:10, I note that it meets the proposed criteria for worship in that is mentions human and possibly spiritual subjects (those in heaven, earth, and under the earth), and a divine object who is universally confessed as “Lord” (the exalted Jesus). I note that the subjects who render the level of action are universal: the implication seems to be that all in the cosmic creation will bow the knee to the exalted Jesus, and this language reflects that of the OT where all creation is called to submit to and worship the Lord.88 The sole exception to the universal rule of Jesus is God himself, who is under no one (1 Cor 15:24–28). The exalted Jesus is under God’s authority, God is under no one’s authority. The level of action which is expressed is that of bowing (“every knee should bow”) and as we shall see in 2:11, every tongue will confess. The context is a religious one because as we shall see, the backdrop to Phil 2:10–11 is the language of Isa 45:23, an OT YHWH text which Paul is applying to the exalted Jesus. Moreover, Paul recognizes that the act of bowing in a religious context denotes worship as we have seen in his reference to the apostate Israelites bowing the knee to Baal in Rom 11:4 (cf. 1 Kgs 19:18).89 It should also be noted that while Paul alludes to Isa 45:23, he would have most probably been aware of the level of action expressed in that text where every knee bows and every tongue confesses or swears by God. The context of Isa 45:23 is clearly religious as God is the divine object to whom these levels of action (bending / bowing and confessing) are directed. The bending or bowing of the knees in a religious context is also seen when God is the object as in Eph 3:14,90 and therefore qualifies as worship. I argue worship is present because it meets the definition and criteria set out in this study. Bowing was an expression of worship that was rendered to God in the OT when the context is religious91 and which could also include idolatry, which was disparaged because it rivaled the worship of God.92 The act of bowing in religious worship to anyone or anything else but God was forbidden.93 When the context is nonreligious, the act was one of respect or obeisance.94 In light of these considerations, we see that the cosmic universal bowing to the exalted Jesus is an act of worship set in a religious context. As Loh and Nida note: “The drift of the passage makes it clear that Jesus is the direct object of worship.”95 The religious context of Phil 2:10 is borne out by the background text of Isa 45:23 to which we now turn. Before doing so, I will address another level of action

THE PURPOSE AND ULTIMATE GOAL OF WORSHIP IN PAUL

| 243

expressed in Phil 2:11, namely, that of confessing. The acclamation or confession of Jesus Christ as “Lord” conveys the idea that he is “installed in the place which properly belongs to God alone,” and the place of ku,rioj in the sentence indicates that it is in the emphatic position.96 With the installment of Jesus as ku,rioj comes also the establishment of his universal sovereignty, since all in heaven, earth, and under the earth bow to him and will confess his lordship. The confessing of Jesus as Lord functions like the bowing of every knee as a universal acknowledgment. The idea of honor is also inherent in this act. Neyrey points out that “[h]onor refers to the claim of worth, value, and respect that must be publicly acknowledged.”97 In this case, as I have noted, the honor which is attributed to the exalted Jesus is openly and universally acknowledged by all. Moreover, the word evxomologe,w, which Paul uses for confessing, carries the primary meaning of to declare something openly or confess publicly.98 However, in the LXX this verb was used to mean “to praise” and “give thanks” to God (LXX Ps 29:5; 105:47; 121:4), and the noun form signified praise and thanksgiving.99 Thayer also defines evxomologe,w as “to celebrate, give praise to.”100 Plummer argues that the notion of praise and thanksgiving reflected in the LXX usage of evxomologe,w “is very appropriate here [Phil 2:11].”101 The word evxomologe,w is the same word found in Isa 45:23, which is the source for Phil 2:11, and it denotes as it does elsewhere in the LXX, “a confession of praise . . . to Yahweh.”102 It is possible in light of this that Paul may have the same meaning in mind with reference to the exalted Jesus in Phil 2:11. If this is the case, then we encounter here a level of action in evxomologe,w predicated on its use in the LXX which communicates the rendering of “praise” and “thanksgiving” to the exalted Jesus where he becomes the direct object of these expressions rendered to him by his universal subjects. It is also possible that the verb evxomologe,w is being used to mean that the cosmic subjects will declare and openly confess the exalted Jesus as Lord. Is it possible that both meanings of evxomologe,w are present here, namely, that not only do the subjects openly declare and confess Jesus as Lord, but also render praise and thanks to him? The scene in Phil 2:10–11 does appear to be an enthronement scene, and hence an open declaration or confession of submission to the Lord Jesus seems to be better suited to the context, including the context of Isa 45:23.103 The idea of praise and thanksgiving may be secondary, but still possibly intended as O’Brien and other scholars note.104 The confession that Jesus is Lord in Phil 2:11 seems to be intended by Paul not only to refer to a final universal and eschatological affirmation vindicating Jesus’ lordship, but also as Hurtado and Hofius note, to be equally applicable to the practice in the Christian community of the common confession of Jesus as Lord in the present.105 Hence what we encounter in 2:10–11 may not only be an eschatological scenario, but also a present realization of the installation of the exalted Jesus as Lord over the cosmos. Here we may be encountering the well-known tension

244

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

in Paul with the now / not yet.106 The exalted Jesus is now acclaimed as Lord by the Christian worshipping community (Rom 10:9–13;1 Cor 1:2; 12:3; 2 Cor 4:5), but he will be ultimately and universally acclaimed as Lord at the eschaton.107 The tension we find in Paul with the now / not yet is also present in the OT where YHWH is said to be the eternal reigning king (Exod 15:18), that YHWH is king now (Ps 10:16; 24:10; 95:3), and yet it foresees the day when YHWH will be king over all the earth (Zech 14:9). The act of bowing to the exalted Jesus and confessing him as Lord prima facie may not appear to be worship as these acts can be rendered towards a monarch or ruler where his subjects bow and confess his lordship over them. However, as we have seen, the subjects of the exalted Jesus are all those in the cosmos, as Craddock notes: “Christ is Lord over every power in the created order.”108 This is implied in the reference to the tripartite cosmic order in Phil 2:10 (those in heaven, earth, and under the earth), something which cannot be said of a mere human monarch whose subjects are earthly and limited. Moreover, the context of Phil 2:10–11 is a religious one, and according to my criteria in order for worship to occur there must be a religious context with a human subject, and a divine object, with a level of action to express the dependence and inferiority of the former to the latter. The inferiority and dependence of the universal subjects in Phil 2:10–11 is seen in their bowing to the exalted Jesus and confessing him as Lord over them. The religious context of Phil 2:10–11 however, is supported by its background source, which most scholars recognize to be Isa 45:23. The background of Phil 2:10–11 is Isa 45:23, which O’Brien calls “a highly significant passage.”109 The text of LXX Isa 45:23 states, katV evmautou/ ovmnu,w h= mh.n evxeleu,setai evk tou/ sto,mato,j mou dikaiosu,nh oi` lo,goi mou ouvk avpostrafh,sontai o[ti evmoi. ka,myei pa/n go,nu kai. evxomologh,setai pa/sa glw/ssa tw/| qew/| / “By myself I swear, righteousness shall surely proceed out of my mouth; my words shall not be frustrated; that to me every knee shall bend, and every tongue shall swear by God.”110 The language here with that of Phil 2:10–11 is striking as it is the same language employed by Paul, especially in terms of the act of bowing and confessing. Every knee will bow to God and every tongue shall swear or confess by him. Again we see here like Phil 2:10–11 that the audience or the subjects are universal. The bowing of every knee to God in Isa 45:23 appears in the context of universal worship by all the nations in addition to a polemical repudiation of idolatry (Isa 45:20–25; cf. Isa 46). The surrounding context of Isa 45:23 indicates first of all the uniqueness of God to save to the ends of the earth (Isa 45:21–22). The context of Isa 45:23 is a religious one, but it is also nestled within a section of Isaiah which is emphatically and assertively monotheistic (Isa 40–48). The Lord is acclaimed as the one true God who deserves the allegiance of the nations as opposed to the idols. The understanding of an anticipated universal worship of God as Lord of all was basic to OT theology according to Martin, “that at the consummation of

THE PURPOSE AND ULTIMATE GOAL OF WORSHIP IN PAUL

| 245

the age all creatures will fall down and worship Yahweh, the king of the world.”111 That Paul understands Isa 45:23 to be a text referring to God or YHWH is evident in his reference to it in Rom 14:11.112 In Phil 2:11 however, Paul applies Isa 45:23 to the exalted Jesus where Jesus becomes the object to whom every knee will bow.113 As Jesus bears the name of “Lord” (YHWH; MT), all creatures are in submission to him.114 Fowl notes that the worship which is reserved for YHWH alone as in Isa 45:23 is directed here to the exalted Jesus.115 A number of scholars have vehemently rejected any notion that the risen Jesus was an object of worship in the earliest Christian community and level the charge that Paul was the innovator of this idea, and in effect, corrupted the early Christian view of Jesus.116 Some scholars who view Paul in this negative light acknowledge readily that the risen Jesus was considered an object of worship for Paul. H.  J. Schoeps for instance argues that Paul, even though he was a Jew nevertheless “. . . departs from the Jewish world-view” when it comes to his treatment of Jesus as a recipient of worship.117 Donald Hagner however, insightfully notes: “But even if Paul is rejected, there is the reality of the pre-Pauline church to be considered.”118 Hagner is correct at this point, for as we have examined above the maranatha prayer to the risen Jesus in 1 Cor 16:22 is recognized to trace its Sitz im Leben to the Judean Christian worshipping community, which was most probably prePauline.119 D. Flusser argues that the authority of the Jerusalem Judean church lies behind the development of Christology.120 Paul therefore is most likely not the originator or innovator of his high view of the risen Jesus in terms of the inclusion of the risen Jesus in Christian worship. The Carmen Christi, however, does not end with the worship of the exalted Jesus. We come to the final words of Phil 2:11. William Barclay has called Phil 2:11 “one of the most important verses in the New Testament.”121 I noted that beginning with Phil 2:9, God highly exalted Jesus with an intended purpose in view. The ultimate aim for the exaltation of Jesus, indeed, of the entire Carmen is that the bowing of every knee to the exalted Jesus and the confessing of every tongue to Jesus as Lord will all be done eivj do,xan qeou/ patro,j / “to the glory of God the Father.” Barclay seems to miss this important point when he states that “[i]n it [Phil 2:11] we read that the aim of God, the dream of God, the purpose of God, is a day when every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord.”122 O’Brien also seems to miss this point when he states: “With these words [“Jesus Christ is Lord”] the hymn reaches its climax.”123 While the universal worship of Jesus is one of the means whereby God is glorified, it is not the aim or purpose of God. The aim and purpose of God is that the level of action given to the exalted Jesus will result and redound to the glory of God the Father. The “glory of God” is also associated with his honor as do,xa can also carry the meaning of “honor” and “respect.”124 The worship of the exalted Jesus will thus bring honor and respect to

246

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

God. To render honor to God is to render worship to him. This worship of the exalted Jesus is not perceived by Paul as a rival worship to God, or a usurpation of God’s glory; rather, Paul sees the worship of the exalted Christ as divinely sanctioned by God himself and willed by God as necessary to bring about the ultimate glory of God. Fowl is thus correct to note that Phil 2:11 “frames all this activity by concluding that it leads to the ‘glory of God the Father’.”125 The worship given to the exalted Jesus does not threaten or challenge the worship of God; it is not an act of “Jesus-olatry,”126 rather it complements the worship of God. In the bowing of every knee and confessional acclamation of every tongue of the exalted Jesus being “Lord,” glory is rendered ultimately to God the Father. Fowl comments: “[T]he worship reserved for Yahweh alone is directed to Christ, without diminishing or competing with the glory of God the Father.”127 The Carmen Christi has thus reached its climatic pinnacle, the Zielangabe, namely, the universal cosmic glorification of God. It is through the worship rendered to the exalted Jesus that the worship of God is also universally achieved, or as Paul states elsewhere, at the eschaton through the risen Jesus God will ultimately be “all in all” (1 Cor 15:28). We can deduce from this that the Carmen has an element of worship associated with it since it ends with worship expressed to the exalted Jesus, which results and redounds to the glory of God the Father. Most scholars like Davorin Peterlin take the Carmen to function as a moral / ethical lesson and a primary call by Paul for unity among the Philippian Christians.128 This view has also been challenged.129 Paul is concerned about unity in the Philippian faith community (Phil 1:27; 2:2), but so much focus has been given to the issue of unity and ethical conduct on the part of Christians in its relation to the Carmen that it has eclipsed another important factor, namely, worship. The root cause for the disunity in the Philippian faith community may be the adversaries Paul warns about in Phil 3:2, those whom he pejoratively calls “the dogs”130 and the enemies of the cross of Christ (Phil 3:18). Paul distinguishes himself and the faith community from them by claiming implicitly that the faith community is the true circumcision oi` pneu,mati qeou/ latreu,ontej kai. kaucw,menoi evn Cristw/| VIhsou/ kai. ouvk evn sarki. pepoiqo,tej / “who serve by the Spirit of God, and boast in Christ Jesus and who have no confidence in the flesh” (Phil 3:3). Paul identifies himself and the Philippian believers as those who are the genuine worshippers of God, and whose boast or glory is in the risen Jesus. Paul’s use of latreu,w in Phil 3:3 is significant from the standpoint that it is the third time Paul uses it in his letters (the other two times are in Rom 1:9, 25 and lastly in 2 Tim 1:3). It is only in Phil 3:3 that Paul uses the word latreu,w in the context of communal worship in which he includes himself. Considering the infrequency of Paul’s use of words for worship in his letters, the presence of latreu,w in Philippians appears to be intentional on Paul’s part. Is it possible that he uses it in this letter to distinguish Christian worshippers as true worshippers of God from

THE PURPOSE AND ULTIMATE GOAL OF WORSHIP IN PAUL

| 247

what he views as pseudo-worshippers (“the dogs” mentioned in Phil 3:2)? Is it also intentional on Paul’s part to use latreu,w, a word which he only uses four times in his letters, after he has written the Carmen Christi in which the climatic ending is the worship of the exalted Jesus which results in the glory of God the Father? I suggest there may be a possible link here. Paul’s concern for unity thus appears to be implicitly tied to worship as well. Worship is supposed to unite the faith community. The Christian faith community are the true worshippers of God according to Paul in Phil 3:3, and in the Carmen Paul shows that the ultimate goal of worship is the universal glory of God, which will be achieved through the agency of the exalted Jesus (Phil 2:10–11). They also boast or glory in the risen Jesus, for he is the Lord whose reign will one day be universally acknowledged by the cosmos, even by the enemies of the cross of Christ (Phil 3:18). The eschatological dimension of the cosmic worship of the exalted Jesus which will result in the ultimate glorification of God may also include the worship by unbelievers or enemies.131 The same idea is reflected in Isa 45:23. John Oswalt comments on Isa 45:23 that “bowing down may be the act of a condemned criminal, but it may also be that of a pardoned worshipper.”132 The Carmen I suggest among other things, is also about the worship of God, for it is with the glory of God that it ends and reaches its conclusion. In summary, the Carmen Christi (Phil 2:6–11) is one of the most intriguing passages in the Pauline letters, and it has been the subject of intense scholarly debate and interest. It is divided into two parts with two themes represented by the movement of descent and ascent. The first part describes the descent of the preexistent Christ (Phil 2:6–8), and the second describes the ascent or exaltation of Christ (Phil 2:9–11). In the first section, Jesus is the active subject, and in the second section, God is the active subject who exalts Jesus and bestows on him the name above every name. I selected in this study to focus mainly on the second part of the Carmen (Phil 2:9–11) as it is specifically germane to the subject of worship. This action on the part of God is the divine response to the humiliation, suffering, and obedient service of Jesus.133 The divine response involves the intended and purposeful exaltation of Jesus by God and the cosmic universal acknowledgment of his lordship expressed by two levels of action: namely that of bowing and confessing, with the result that God will be ultimately and maximally glorified. The background to this universal acclamation and expression of worship to the exalted Jesus is widely acknowledged as a direct allusion to the OT text of Isa 45:23, where YHWH or ku,rioj (LXX) receives universal submission by the bending of every knee, and the confession of allegiance of every tongue. In the assessment of the Carmen I noted that a number of scholars appeared to be unsure as to whether or not worship was being offered to the exalted Jesus. I noted that various terms such as “homage,” “adoration,” “devotion,” “veneration,”

248

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

“reverence,” and “worship” were used to attempt to explain the action of bowing the knee and confessing Jesus as Lord. The use of these various terms appear to indicate a fluidity, or possibly an uncertainty or reticence in applying the word “worship” to the exalted Jesus in the Carmen. Some scholars combine some of the words above with “worship” and sometimes give the impression that they are not the same as “worship.” The difficulty with the use of these various words in a discussion on worship is that they can create confusion in the absence of a clear definition of their meaning. Is veneration, devotion, reverence, adoration, and homage to the risen Jesus equivalent to worship? Or are they different? Are these terms meant to be taken synonymously? It is my conviction that the reason for this reticence on the part of scholars is the absence of a proper working definition for worship and a lack of criteria for establishing the practice of worship. If worship cannot be properly defined, then it cannot be properly identified and explained. We saw that the words Paul uses for worship in his letters (latreu,w, latrei,a, seba,zomai, douleu,w, proskune,w, and qrhskei,a) are not used in the climax of the Carmen (Phil 2:9–11). I concluded that the only way we could determine whether worship was rendered to the exalted Jesus was by defining worship and providing criteria to establish the practice of worship. Furthermore, I concluded from this study that worship does indeed appear in Phil 2:9–11, and that it is directly rendered to the exalted Jesus, and by extension, to God the Father. The reasons for this conclusion are as follows: Worship is a personal relational religious act between a human or spiritual subject, either individually or collectively in a group, and a superhuman or superspiritual entity who is the divine object. In Phil 2:10, we see that the subjects are implicitly human and spiritual (those in heaven, earth, and under the earth), and the divine object in this case is the exalted Jesus, who bears the name of God (“Lord”) with which he was graced. The nature of the subjects being comprised of all the created order, and their submission and allegiance to the exalted Jesus who is confessed by them as “Lord” establishes the criteria that in worship the subject or minor is always inferior to and dependent on the object, who occupies a major and higher position. A religious context is also axiomatic for worship to take place. If the act is not performed in a religious context, worship does not take place. Philippians 2:9–11 is recognized as having its source in Isa 45:23, a religious text where God receives the submission of all the nations and their confession and allegiance to his sovereign lordship. The appropriation of Isa 45:23 by Paul, a text he knows to have God as its divine object and which he used elsewhere (cf. Rom 14:11), reinforces the position that the context of Phil 2:9–11 must necessarily also be religious. In a religious context I have argued, there must be a subject or worshipper, the one who performs the act or level of action, and a superhuman entity who is functionally the worshipped object, the one who receives the level of action

THE PURPOSE AND ULTIMATE GOAL OF WORSHIP IN PAUL

| 249

or act of worship. In order to communicate and express the relationship between the worshipper and the worshipped one, the worshipper engages in various actions or levels of action to indicate his or her inferiority to and dependence on the divine object. Since a religious context is evident in Phil 2:9–11, I argue worship is present, and that this is further substantiated based on the three main points of the proposed criteria when applied to the text: 1. 2. 3.

the subject(s): the created cosmos, consisting of those in heaven, earth, and under the earth (v. 10) level of action or medium: bowing / bending of every knee; the confessing of every tongue that Jesus Christ is “Lord” (v. 10) the object(s): the exalted Jesus, and by extension God the Father (v. 11)

The exalted Jesus as I have noted does not replace God or take worship from God. God is worshipped through the worship of the exalted Jesus. The worship which is given to the exalted Jesus does not usurp the worship of God, nor does it rival the worship of God; it rather complements the worship of God and facilitates it. Paul thus includes the exalted Jesus within Christian worship. The eschatological grande finale for Paul is the ultimate and universal glorification of God which God has purposed to be achieved through the worship of the exalted Jesus. The importance and centrality of the risen Jesus in relation to Christian worship, which I have argued from the beginning of this study, is evident here. God cannot be ultimately and maximally glorified according to Paul, without, or apart from, the exalted Jesus. Paul thus sees worship from a teleological perspective as fulfilled in the ultimate expression of honor that is given to God by the entire cosmos, through the agency of the exalted Jesus.

CHAPTER SEVEN

Summary and Conclusions

7.1. Concluding Statements At the beginning of this study, I proposed the hypothesis that the concept of worship in Paul is a composite and comprehensive one, involving a personal religious relationship between the worshipper and God. This relationship is communicated and established by various actions or levels of action. I also included in my hypothesis the idea that worship in Paul seems to be related in one way or another to the presence of the risen Jesus in the worshipping faith communities. Since Paul is our earliest NT writer, a study on the origins of Christian worship must begin with Paul as our earliest source. I proceeded to address the problem that the subject of worship in Paul’s writings is one which has been given little attention, a point which has been recognized by a number of Pauline scholars.1 The subject of worship is usually approached from a very broad and general perspective which involves approaching it as a standard concept in the NT, at least when it is approached using only the English word worship. This has tended to lead readers in the direction of assuming that “worship” was a standard concept that was shared by writers like Paul. One of the problems I addressed is the tendency among scholars to explain worship instead of defining it. Neyrey has noted this problem: “Most biblical scholars interested in this topic tend to describe worship, not define it. They favor itemizing its elements.”2 This observation on the part of Neyrey is an impor-

252

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

tant one as it is a relatively recent one (his book Give God the Glory was published in 2007), which indicates that the problem of defining worship continues to be a present concern and issue in scholarship. Thus as Neyrey observes: “[T]here is an ongoing conversation on the topic of worship”3 If scholars, according to Neyrey, tend to explain worship and not define it, the question arises: how can one describe something which has not first been clearly defined? C. C. Richardson has thus rightly argued that some scholars tend to focus instead on the development of worship in the faith community while omitting a proper definition for worship.4 This raises a legitimate question: how does one focus on the development of something which has not been defined? I then examined in the second chapter the views of six scholars who have written on the subject of worship in the NT, namely, Oscar Cullmann, C. F. D. Moule, D. Gerhard Delling, Ralph P. Martin, Ferdinand Hahn, and David E. Aune. I investigated their definitions and criteria for worship. I also examined the views of three contemporary scholars who have written on the subject of worship: Larry Hurtado, Jerome Neyrey, and Richard Bauckham. It should be recognized that these scholars have made tremendous contributions in the scholarly field as key exponents in the area of early Christian worship. They all recognized the importance of observing the practical expressions that were used in a worship context such as prayers, hymns, creeds, baptism, and the Eucharist. Aune summarized these practical expressions in worship as having a “primarily verbal character” to them.5 Cullmann regarded these practical expressions as constitutive of the spiritual experience of the early Christians. Others like Moule, Martin, Hahn, and Aune, investigated the relationship between early Christian worship and Judaism as its matrix, especially with the worship of the synagogue. With the exception of Cullmann, these scholars also treated some of the words for “worship” and discussed their relevance albeit briefly. Moule, Hahn, and Aune, also discussed the importance of understanding worship in the context of a corporate communal gathering. Martin and Aune both brought forward the important issue of the difficulty of finding a formal definition of worship in the biblical texts as the early sources tend to be incomplete, and fragmentary, by way of offering a definition. In this respect, Martin and Aune have opened up an important area in the study of worship by calling attention to the fact that the texts themselves do not offer or provide a formal definition for worship, or working criteria for worship. It thus appears that for a writer like Paul, he had no formal definition for worship. Paul had no one word that meant “worship.” A topic related to the area of worship in this study is the place of the risen Jesus. Delling and Aune have emphasized the importance of the place of the risen Jesus in Christian worship, which Aune sees as a distinctive feature of Christian worship. Aune made the very important observation of the subject-object relationship

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

| 253

in the worship paradigm, and the importance of the context in which Christian worship appears, indicating a relation between the two. Aune also highlighted the importance of worship being relational. Aune described this relationship as homage being paid to both God and Christ in the faith community. Here Aune has included the risen Jesus as an object of homage within Christian worship, a theme which in my estimation is important for early Christian worship, because of its peculiarity in relation to worship in Judaism. Another important point Aune has advanced is the application of the use of family language in reference to the corporate faith community, which highlights the relational aspect of the faith community, while at the same time evoking themes of dependence and honor towards God. Aune has made important progress in the study of early Christian worship. It was noted nevertheless in the assessment of these scholars, that their approach to the study of worship was a broad one in that they canvassed the entire NT. In the examination of their respective approaches to the area of early Christian worship, I noted that a clear working definition and criteria of worship based on the NT texts was still not clear. Sometimes they took the English word worship and used it as the determining word to describe the relationship between the believer(s) and God. Moule defined worship as follows: “Worship is work . . . all work done and all life lived for God’s sake is, in essence, worship.”6 While this is theologically true, this does not interpret worship at its most basic root level. Worship must be interpreted within the wide semantic field of words that the NT employs to communicate the phenomena of the relationship between the human and God. Moule is actually describing worship here, not so much defining it. Moule’s description of worship being “all work” and “all life” lived for God’s sake is partially true in a descriptive sense. The tendency in Moule’s comment is the idea that this is all that worship is. This would be to reduce worship to one common element. We have seen in this research that worship cannot be reduced to only one element but that it appears to be rather multifaceted and multilayered. Delling as we saw defines worship from a philosophical point of view: “Worship is the self-portal of religion. In Worship the sources by which religion lives are made visible, its expectations and hopes are expressed, and the forces which sustain it are made known.”7 Delling like Moule, ends up describing worship and not defining it. Martin defined worship in the following terms: “To worship God is to ascribe to Him supreme worth, for He alone is worthy.”8 Here we also see a description of worship, not so much a definition. The ascribing of supreme worth to God would be an ingredient of worship, but does this definition fully embrace all of worship? Is worship reducible to the ascription of supreme worth to God? I have not found this to be the case in this study. Hahn also describes worship practices but never formally defines worship.9 Aune remarks that: “worship involves praise directed to the focus of worship.”10 While praise is certainly one ingredient in worship, it is not the only one, nor can

254

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

all of worship be reduced to praise. This again describes worship, but does not necessarily define it. Here I recall Neyrey’s timely critique that some scholars tend to describe worship rather than define it.11 While these scholars which I surveyed have advanced important ingredients regarding early Christian worship, they differed in their approach. I feel in my estimation that they were not considering all the ingredients of worship. They have the right pieces for the mosaic of worship, but the whole picture of worship is still missing other pieces, and therefore it remains incomplete. In the absence of a whole comprehensive picture of worship it is difficult in my estimation to treat and discuss the subject of worship. At other times I found the approaches of these scholars to be very general, and others brought assumptions into the NT texts about worship that did not appear to be substantiated. For instance, Cullmann and Delling were of the opinion that no Christian gathering occurred without the celebration of the Eucharist, so that the Eucharist was a feature of every Christian gathering.12 I found this to be more assumed than proven. Another tendency that was noted in both Cullmann13 and Delling14 was that they seemed to approach first century worship via the lenses of twentieth century liturgical worship practice. I saw this as a renewed call for a need for further study on the definition of worship from its first century Sitz im Leben. I noted as well that there was little engagement of the actual words used for worship. When such words are examined, they tended to be treated very briefly with no substantial commentary or expansion on their meaning and place within the context of worship. In addition to these observations, I note that while a study of corporate worship is important, there is also a need to fully investigate worship in its personal or individualistic dimension. In this respect, worship can be both personal in an individualistic context, and also communal. I also examined as I mentioned earlier three contemporary scholars who have addressed the issue of early Christian worship: Larry Hurtado, Jerome Neyrey, and Richard Bauckham. Hurtado’s work has generally been concerned with the subject of Jesus devotion in early Christianity as an object of worship. I feel that this is a very important component of worship which Hurtado has highlighted. Hurtado recognizes the difficulty in defining worship and speaks of the “potential vagueness of the term ‘worship’”15 as well as acknowledging the wide range of semantic possibilities with the words employed in the NT text.16 Hurtado acknowledges the importance of the semantic range of words employed for worship in Paul, and elsewhere in the biblical texts. In his works, Hurtado appears more interested in focusing on the actions of worship. He mentions “specific devotional actions attested in Paul’s letters” and “devotional phenomena,” which “are best taken as ‘worship’.”17 Hurtado does attempt to provide a definition for worship: “I use the term ‘worship’ to mean the actions of reverence intended to express specifically religious devotion of the sort given to a deity in the cultures or traditions most directly relevant

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

| 255

to earliest Christianity.”18 Here Hurtado brings forward important details about worship as “actions of reverence” that express a “specifically religious devotion” which is given “to a deity.” I agree that reverence and “actions of reverence” is an important part of worship, but that it is not constitutive of all of worship. This study has led me to observe that the picture of worship in Paul’s writings defies any one element as fully descriptive and definitional of worship as a whole. In my examination of Jerome Neyrey we saw that he approaches the subject of worship from a social-cultural perspective or social science model. Neyrey presents important points in terms of the structure or paradigm of worship, namely: (1) the object of worship, (2) the purpose of worship: to honor the deity, and (3) forms of worship: reverent life, piety, and liturgy.19 He sees an object of worship as necessary to this paradigm, including forms in which this worship is communicated, and the purpose for worship. Neyrey makes reference to the relationship in worship as that of the “subordinate to a superior.20 This is a very important step forward in dealing with the worship paradigm. Neyrey acknowledges that definitions of worship are rare.21 He proposes that a definition of worship can be arrived at by using Malina’s proposed social science model of communication theory for prayer,22 which Neyrey adjusts to provide an adequate definition of worship.23 Neyrey however, goes on to classify worship in terms of communication theory, which he argues can be seen in the prayer model of mortals communicating with God, and God speaking to the “Jesus Group” or faith community.24 The problem here in my view, is that Neyrey seems to suggest that worship at a basic level is defined in terms of prayer: “We have an adequate model of worship, primarily based on . . . the process of communication . . . Worship, moreover, expresses the communication of a group of Christian disciples with God.”25 The act of prayer is an important item of worship that illustrates one feature of worship, but it is not representative of all of worship. This has the tendency to reduce worship to only one element. We have seen this recurring tendency among some scholars which have been examined above to find a common denominator for worship, or a tendency to reduce it to one particular element. When I examined Richard Bauckham, I observed that he shared common views regarding worship with Hurtado, particularly in the area of the worship of Jesus. Bauckham’s main focus of study has been on the question of “divine identity.”26 It is on the basis of the “divine identity” in distinction to everything else that Bauckham sees the context of worship. Bauckham comments that it is “worship which signaled the distinction between God and every creature, however exalted.”27 Bauckham does provide a definition of worship as follows: “Worship is the honor paid to the one God, and the one God is the one to whom worship is given.”28 Bauckham also sees descriptions or expressions such as prayers, invocations, doxologies, and hymns as indicative of worship.29 Bauckham’s definition

256

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

of worship in my estimation is very brief and incomplete. We see here that for Bauckham, worship is “honor” paid to God. I would agree. I respond however, that while the giving of honor is an important aspect in worship, it nevertheless is still only one component of worship, and not descriptive of all of worship. In my survey of the scholars mentioned above, I noted that important contributions have been brought forward in the area of Christian worship. What I noted however, was that there was a shortcoming on a full and clear definition for worship, and a working criteria to establish worship. All too often the tendency has been to try and reduce worship to one particular word or element which is then taken as descriptive of all of worship. In my estimation, I see this tendency as committing the fallacy of composition, wherein a conclusion is drawn about a whole based on the features of one of its constituent parts, when in fact, no justification is provided for such an inference. Some scholarly treatment of worship is usually truncated because of the following three points: (1) there is no formal and proper working definition and criteria for worship, (2) the tendency is to describe worship rather than define it, and (3) the English word worship is usually taken for granted, and its modern ecclesiastical usage is usually read back into the Pauline letters, rather than letting Paul’s worship vocabulary define itself. This results in an eisegetical approach to Paul’s view of worship, rather than an exegetical approach. In light of these considerations, I suggested a way forward by providing a proposed definition and criteria for worship which is as follows: Worship is a personal relational religious act of total submission between a human or spiritual subject, either individually or collectively in a group, and a superhuman, divine, or heavenly, superspiritual entity or entities, God, a god, or gods, including their representation(s) by way of an idol or idols. In this religious context, the human (or spiritual) subject is functionally the worshipper, the active subject, the one who performs the act or medium of worship, and God or a superhuman (or spiritual heavenly) entity is functionally the passive object, the worshipped object, the one who receives the act of worship. A religious context is axiomatic for worship to take place. If the act is not performed in a religious context, worship does not take place. The two main ingredients in worship are those of personal relationship and action. Relationally, the worshipper is considered to be inferior and dependent on God. Thus, the relationship can be expressed as that of a minor subject (the worshipper), to a major object (God). To communicate and express this relationship between the worshipper and the worshipped, the worshipper engages in various actions or levels of action, or vehicles of action, to indicate his or her inferiority to and dependence on God. These levels of action function as the medium between the worshipper and God. Many of these actions are taken in a metaphorical application in that the worshipper exercises these actions as if God were in fact visibly and / or symbolically present before him or her, as a human magistrate or human

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

| 257

monarch would be. These expressions can be visible, audible, inaudible, and verbal. Nevertheless, they are outward expressions of what the worshipper is internally expressing in the heart. In addition to this definition, I also proposed the following criteria as a paradigm for worship: There are three necessary elements or criteria that function as levels in this worship paradigm: 1. 2. 3.

the subject(s) (human, spiritual) level of action or medium (praise, service, prostration, bowing invocation, prayer) the object(s) (superhuman or superspiritual being or their representations in idols)

I also proposed that worship is a composite phenomenon that will involve all three of the above criteria. All three of the above criteria as a cumulative whole are crucial to comprehensively understand worship and its dynamics. The two main approaches to worship in Paul that we examined and followed in this study were that of: 1. 2.

words used by Paul to designate worship expressions and acts referred to in the Pauline letters which describe worship

Prior to addressing the words and practical expressions for worship used by Paul in his letters, I examined in the third chapter what for Paul was the object of worship. In the Pauline letters, God is usually the divine object who receives the level of action from the human subject(s). In a worship or religious context, God is the passive object who receives the various acts of worship. The human subject is always inferior to, subject to, and dependent on God. An important component of worship in regards to the divine object is the idea of rendering honor. In the socialcultural world of Paul, honor and shame were the standards of ethics and status.30 Honor was seen as synonymous with reverence, praise, blessing, and thanks.31 Paul understands honor to be differentiated in that it can be given to various referents such as government, parents, fellow believers, widows, elders, masters, and angels. The identity of the object is crucial because it is determinative of the honor and the claim of worth that is due to the said object. The rendering and level of honor is always commensurate to the identity of the object to which it is offered. The greater the spatial distance between a subject and object, the greater the honor that is to be given. Since God is beyond and above all creation, his honor is the greatest above all others. Paul thus shows that honor that is given to God is unique in that it cannot be given to any other. The rendering of honor in and of itself does not constitute an act of worship. When honor is rendered in a religious context, then it takes on the meaning of worship. To honor God in a religious context is thus to

258

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

render worship to God. The rendering of honor is also closely tied as we have seen with acknowledgment. To give honor to someone is to acknowledge that person. When God is honored, he is acknowledged whether it be in his role as creator, provider, protector, or savior, among others, and he is worthy and rightfully deserving of such honor. A corollary of rendering honor to God in worship was also the idea of total submission. This is a theme that recurs in various worship contexts. While submission can be given to others in a relative sense, total submission according to Paul belongs to God alone. Other words used to speak of God’s honor are dAbK and do,xa usually translated in English as “glory.” When used of God these words denote the idea that God possesses such qualities as honor, which is to say that he is rich and wealthy, and therefore, he has an abundance of resources. Due to the possession of these riches, he is heavy with a weight of resources. As a result of such possessions, God is to be afforded honor, distinction, and respect. We saw that in Paul’s doxology in Rom 11:33–36 he attributes these qualities to God in a superlative way. I then turned our attention to the subject of worship, and the criteria for proper worship. The subject of worship is the active agent who performs the act of worship. A significant feature of the subject of worship is that of utter and complete dependence on the object of worship. Paul communicates this theme of total dependence or submission on God in various way by employing various relational terms such as servant-master (Rom 14:4; 2 Cor 6:4), and child-parent (Rom 8:14–17; 2 Cor 6:18; Gal 3:26; 4:5–6). The idea of dependence is inferred from these relational terms. Paul will employ metaphorical language in which the worshipper is called a “living sacrifice” (Rom 12:1), a “temple of the Holy Spirit” (1 Cor 6:19–20), or collectively with other worshippers the “temple of God” (1 Cor 3:16–17), “a holy temple in the Lord” (Eph 2:21–22).32 Paul sees the worshipper in a faithful relationship of loyalty, love, allegiance, and submission to God the way a servant and child would be to his or her respective master and parent. The difference in terms of submission as noted earlier is that in reference to God there is total submission, whereas in reference to all others (government, parents, elders/leaders of the church, fellow believers), submission is partial and relative. What determines the relationship between the subject and the object in the worship paradigm are the level of actions that are rendered by the subject. I examined the question of whether or not Paul had criteria for proper worship, and I assessed three passages: Phil 3:3; 1 Cor 10:19–22, and 2 Tim 2:19d, 22. We discovered from these texts that Paul did hold certain criteria to qualify true worship from false worship. Paul did not view all worship as legitimate. While Paul held that other things, or beings, could be worshipped, such worship was nevertheless in his mind, illegitimate worship because it dishonored God. There is an overlap between worship and honor. When God is worshipped, he is honored,

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

| 259

because he is publicly acknowledged. When we examined Phil 3:3 we saw that Paul sharply distinguished true worshippers from false worshippers. He saw himself and his faith community as those who were part of the true “circumcision,” thus evoking covenantal and relational themes, and as such they worshipped by the Spirit of God, so that their boast was in Christ, and they put no confidence in the flesh. He disparagingly referred to his opponents as “dogs” who implicitly did not render true worship (Phil 3:2). Paul sees worship as something that is facilitated by the Spirit of God and something that only those of the true circumcision can render. First Corinthians 10:19–22 deals with the issue of food or meat offered to idols, and Paul argues that what is sacrificed to idols is in actual fact sacrifices to demons. He urges and warns the Corinthian Christians not to partake of this food because in doing so, they are compromising their allegiance to the Lord and forging a relationship with demons by participation in food offered to them, which is tantamount to unfaithfulness to the Lord. Paul cites the practice of the Eucharist as a concrete point of contact that they cannot eat and drink from the Lord’s Table and cup while also partaking of the table and cup of the idols, whom Paul identifies as demons. In 1 Cor 10:19–22, Paul is presenting a context of rival worship (the Lord vs. the demons), and he argues in terms of the legitimacy and illegitimacy of such worship. The worship of demons in Paul’s mind is illegitimate. To further establish the element of allegiance in worship, Paul warns the Corinthians that if they continue in their aberrant behavior, they will provoke the Lord to jealousy (1 Cor 10:22). In 2 Tim 2:19d, 22, the one who names the name of the Lord is called to depart from iniquity and is to follow ethical standards. It also qualifies those who follow these ethical standards as those who call on the Lord from a pure heart. A link between an act of worship, and following ethical standards is made here. The reference to exercising ethical standards implies that those who worship God are to show their allegiance and faithfulness to him by outwardly expressing obedience to him. In this regard, the worshipper shows his or her act of worship by also living ethically. The implication is also made in 2 Tim 2:22 that if such worship is not rendered with a pure heart, it is not truly worship. I concluded from this that Paul understood worship to have a qualitative aspect to it. In order for it to be properly rendered to God, it must meet criteria for it to be done correctly and with the right intentions. It has to proceed from a pure heart. To reinforce the relational aspect and element of honor in worship to God, we examined Paul’s use of family language in reference to the worshipping community as the family of God. Here Paul employed the family relationship of child-parent where the child or children is the worshipping community and God is the parent. The family institution was central in Paul’s social cultural world, and I demonstrated this point as well from Aristotle’s writings on the family. Elements of Aristotle’s position on the family are also found in Paul. This study has presented nothing

260

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

new in this respect in NT scholarship. I merely used this use of family language by Paul for the faith community to show that Paul uses familial language to reinforce the themes of honor, submission, and ownership to God, but also that of intimacy. By bringing family language into his description of the faith community, Paul is placing it into a religious context, and in so doing he is infusing it with nuances of worship. It is within the context of family that one of the closest relationships exist, primarily that of the child-parent and that of siblings with one another. The aspect of honor is seen in that the parent is to be given special honor and service from their children, as they are the source and provider of the children’s well-being and welfare. While honor is seen in the use of family language, the notion of submission is also present where children are to submit to their parents in obedience (cf. Eph 6:1–3; Col 3:20). The idea of ownership is also seen in Paul’s use of family language. The child as a dependent is the possession of the parents, and his or her allegiance is to the parents. Paul’s use of family language also demonstrated two dimensional aspects in the worship paradigm. In terms of the vertical dimension, they are subject to their heavenly parent who is superior to them and to whom they owe honor. This I argued translates into worship as one element of worship is rendering honor to God. In the relationship of siblings to one another, I argued that such a relationship can be termed horizontal in that siblings stand on an equal footing with one another. Their relationship with one another however, is predicated on their relationship to the source of their existence, namely, the heavenly parent: God. The honor and service that they as children owe God constitutes worship, for in thanking him, praising him, and serving him, they acknowledge him and honor him as their Father. Paul’s use of family language thus powerfully reinforces various elements of worship, but not all the elements of worship. The appropriation of family language is only one among many examples of how Paul perceives worship. At other times, Paul will employ paradigms for worship of a different kind such as that of servant-master where the worshipper is the servant / slave, and God is the master (Rom 14:4; 2 Cor 6:4). In this servant-master paradigm, the element of close intimacy that one finds in Paul’s family language is lacking. Paul’s use of the servant-master relationship is intended by him to communicate the particular elements of dependence, submission, and allegiance (1 Thess 1:9). It should be noted that some of these elements overlap with the family paradigm, but by using the servant-master paradigm Paul wishes to highlight more explicitly the themes of utter obedience, and submission, and the surrender of one’s rights to the master. We observed that by Paul’s selective appropriation of family and servant-master relationships, he indicates implicitly that for him, worship was not reduced to one particular paradigm, but that he viewed it as multifaceted.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

| 261

I began chapter 4 by exploring and examining Paul’s description of worship in light of language. I investigated the various words that Paul employed for worship such as latreu,w, latrei,a, seba,zomai, proskune,w, douleu,w and qrhskei,a. These words with the exception of douleu,w are generally translated as “worship” in English translations of Paul’s letters in the NT. The appearance of these words in the Pauline letters, were very infrequent with some of them appearing in Paul’s letters as hapax legomena. I have set out in the following table below these various words used by Paul, and their frequency or number of occurrences for worship in the Pauline letters. This study has provided the following results summarized in table 3 below. The appearance of these words in light of all of Paul’s letters are surprisingly very sparse. The verbs latreu,w, latrei,a, seba,zomai, and the noun latrei,a, are very strong words for worship and yet Paul employs them very infrequently.33 The verb seba,zomai is a Pauline hapax legomenon. The verb proskune,w while used in the NT as a standard word for “worship” (e.g., Matthew and Revelation),34 is also a Pauline hapax legomenon. The word qrhskei,a is also a Pauline hapax legomenon. The word with the highest frequency is douleu,w, but this word is comparatively weak in relation to the other words Paul uses for worship. While it can carry implications of worship, its primary meaning is that of serving, and it can have a wider semantic range of human referents. These findings suggest that Paul had no formal word for “worship” as we do in the English language where it carries a univocal meaning. The absence of a consistent formal word used by Paul to communicate the notion of worship supports my findings. This has led to the conclusion that for Paul worship is a comprehensive description of the basic religious relationship of the human subject to the divine worshipped object. This relationship is communicated by a series of various words which in turn communicate various important elements of what is constitutive of the relationship of the worshipper to God. Worship as a comprehensive description of one’s relationship to God is like a mosaic for Paul. It is a complete picture constituted of numerous individual pieces, all of which highlight a particular feature of the mosaic. None of these individual pieces by themselves constitute the whole mosaic, but collectively, and together, they form an overall picture. In translating the words latreu,w, latrei,a, seba,zomai, proskune,w, and qrhskei,a as “worship,” English translations have in effect assimilated these words under one categorical heading (“worship”), and have as a result suppressed the various nuances these words were meant to convey by Paul in his description of the human’s relationship to God.35 When this occurs, I feel in Neyrey’s words, that words and their meanings will be “lost in translation.”36 When we examine the nuances of these words, we note a variety of meanings emerge which contribute to the overall picture of worship. The words latreu,w and latrei,a communicate the basic notion of service in a religious context, where the

262

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

Table 3. Frequency of Pauline words for worship in New Testament letters Pauline Corpus Romans 1 Corinthians 2 Corinthians Galatians Ephesians Philippians Colossians

latreu,w latrei,a seba,zomai proskune,w douleu,w qrhskei,a 2

2

1

3 1

1

1

1 Thessalonians 2 Thessalonians 1 Timothy 2 Timothy Titus Philemon

Total

1 1

1

6

1

1

4

2

1

1

referents of these words are divine objects. These words can be used both in an individual and communal context. Both can also be used of an internal and external aspect of service to God. Paul uses the verb latreu,w to speak of his personal service to God in the proclamation of the gospel (Rom 1:9–10; cf. 2 Tim 1:3). Paul serves God internally with his spirit, but this service is also expressed externally by Paul in proclaiming or announcing the gospel. He serves God externally in the capacity of proclaiming the gospel because this is an act of obedience to God. In the act of proclaiming the gospel to others, Paul is in effect serving God under his shadow as it were. Paul also uses latreu,w in Rom 1:25 to argue that humans instead of rendering religious service to idols, ought rather, to render this religious service to God alone who is worthy. In Phil 3:3 Paul employs latreu,w to speak of the service which he, and the Christian faith community, collectively renders to God, as the true “circumcision,” and that they render this service by the Spirit of God. The verb latreu,w contributed to the study of worship by bringing forward an important aspect in worship, that of rendering service to God, which entails obedience. Then noun latrei,a also refers to service to God. Paul places it within a religious context when he speaks of the religious service or temple service that was given to the nation of Israel (Rom 9:4). In Rom 12:1 Paul used this word to describe what constituted the reasonable religious service that Christian believers should render. Paul does this by employing the use of metaphor. He compares the faith community to a living sacrifice. Paul commands that they present their

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

| 263

bodies as a living sacrifice which is to be holy and acceptable to God, and which he summarily defines as their logikh.n latrei,an / “reasonable service.” The metaphor of sacrifice vividly communicates notions of absolute surrender and total submission to God, while at the same time being an on-going act of service, as it is described as a living sacrifice. Paul also touches on the quality of service which is to be rendered. It is not just any form of service to God. It must be holy and acceptable to God, which implies there are some forms of service which would be unacceptable to God. We saw therefore that the idea of service to God also carried with it connotations of proper, absolute surrender, and total submission to God. The noun latrei,a contributed to this study of worship by highlighting the aspect of service to God in terms of total submission, which Paul emphasized by the use of a sacrifice metaphor. When we examined the verb seba,zomai, we observed that this was the only word for worship Paul used in conjunction with another word for worship in a single sentence, namely, latreu,w. We observed this word appears once in Paul, and in a context where Paul is strongly denouncing idolatry (Rom 1:25). The word seba,zomai carries the meaning of reverential awe, or to honor religiously. In a religious context, this word communicates the sense of awe that the worshipper experiences when relating to the deity.37 Paul uses this word to argue that in the act of idolatry people were honoring idols when they should have been rendering such honor and reverence to God alone, who is the creator and the rightful recipient of such honor (Rom 1:25). The rendering of honor in Paul’s social cultural world involved the claim of worth, value, and respect, that had to be publicly acknowledged.38 While the element of reverence and respect is tied into the verb seba,zomai, the element of awe is also part of this verb. The idea of awe or fear of the divine was tied into showing reverence (2 Cor 7:1; cf. Prov 1:7; Rom 3:18). Since honor was something that had to be publicly acknowledged, the honor that was rendered to God would be publicly acknowledged in the context of the faith community, and in this act they would be worshipping God. The verb seba,zomai contributed to the study of worship by highlighting the aspect of reverence, respect, honor, and awe, towards God. When we examined the verb proskune,w I noted that it was a Pauline hapax legomenon (1 Cor 14:25). This word appears in a passage where Paul is addressing the worship gathering and activities of the Corinthian faith community. While this word can have a wide semantic range of meaning with human referents, Paul brings this word into a religious context in 1 Cor 14 and therefore infuses it with nuances of worship. Paul applies this verb to an unbeliever who enters the worship gathering of the Corinthian faith community and who upon hearing the prophesying that occurs in the faith community is convicted and performs proskune,w to God. Paul thus uses proskune,w in a worship setting. In employing the word

264

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

proskune,w, Paul is using a word which brings out an external aspect of worship, namely, that of submission, dependence, and acknowledgment expressed or mediated by actions such as prostrating oneself, to fall upon the knees, and to touch the ground with the forehead. This act communicated by proskune,w appears to be a visible and physical one. This appears to be supported by the fact that Paul associates the act of proskune,w with pesw.n evpi. pro,swpon / “falling on his face” (RSV, ESV). Closely tied to proskune,w is the element of God’s presence in the faith community. These external visible gestures inherent in proskune,w communicate a sense of standing or appearing before a superior, in this case God. This is affirmed and supported with the phrase uttered by the unbeliever who performs proskune,w: :Ontwj o` qeo.j evn u`mi/n evstin / “God is really among you.” In placing proskune,w in close proximity with this phrase, Paul is showing a connection between the act of proskune,w and an immediate realization of the presence of God. The unique contribution that proskune,w makes to the overall picture of worship is that it brings forward the aspect of submission, dependence, and acknowledgment towards God by means of visible and physical bodily postures. It also recognizes the reality of the presence of God with his people in worship. While we have seen elements of submission to God in latreu,w and latrei,a, and elements of acknowledging God by reverencing him in seba,zomai, these words do not immediately carry the physical bodily expressions of prostration and falling on one’s knees that proskune,w does. In this respect there is some overlap between these words, but proskune,w is a word that expresses submission and surrender to God in a concrete and public way while also heightening the notion of the divine presence of God in the worship gathering of the faith community. When we examined douleu,w, we observed that it carried the meaning of to be subjected to someone, to serve, and that it carries the idea of ownership or possession with the notion of total service to another. This word like proskune,w has a wide semantic range of meaning and can apply to both human referents, impersonal referents, the risen Jesus, and God. We observed that this word is used five times by Paul in reference to serving the risen Jesus (Rom 12:11; 14:18; 16:18; Eph 6:7; Col 3:24). Paul only uses it directly of God once in 1 Thess 1:9. Of all the words we surveyed, douleu,w is the only word that does not necessarily mean “worship” and is not translated as “worship” in English translations. We examined this word in our study because when it is used in a religious context it can take on a nuance for worship in that it denotes service to God, but more importantly it denotes possession and ownership by God. Since this word is associated with the service of slaves or servants to their masters, it also communicates the ideas of possession and ownership as well as submission and allegiance, which a slave or servant owes to his or her master. In this study I noted that Paul employed the servant-master relationship to express the relationship of the worshipper to God. When Paul places the servant-master

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

| 265

relationship in a religious context, the ideas of total submission and allegiance to God overlap with worship themes. Paul applies the servant-master relationship in his earliest letter to illustrate the idea of ownership / possession and allegiance to the master (1 Thess 1:9–10). In this text, Paul presented a clear transition from one master (idols) to another (God). Paul’s use of douleu,w here suggested a change of service of masters. While Paul is not specifically dealing with worship in 1 Thess 1:9–10, I noted that his use of douleu,w could carry implications of worship in that it suggested the idea of religious service formerly to idols, and now to God. The verb douleu,w thus carries an overlapping meaning with worship in terms of service to God. While Paul uses a much more stronger word for service (latreu,w) which has a distinctly religious connotation to it and is usually used of service to God or the gods, the verb douleu,w appears to contribute to the overall study of worship by stressing the particular nuances of possession, ownership, and faithful allegiance to the master. As servants or slaves, believers are God’s ownership and possession, and they owe their uncompromising allegiance to him alone. I then turned our attention to the last word in our examination: qrhskei,a. This word is used in Col 2:18 in reference to angels and has been a source of considerable scholarly debate as to whether the qrhskei,a| tw/n avgge,lwn / “worship of angels” refers to an objective or subjective genitive. While I commented on these contrasting views, I felt that this argument was not germane to the research, principally because Paul addresses the practice of qrhskei,a in reference to angels in a negative manner (cf. Col 2:23). For this reason I felt that the debate whether the reference to angels is in the objective or subjective genitive is ultimately irrelevant to Paul, since his reference to this practice is denunciatory in nature. This denunciation seems to implicitly support the idea that qrhskei,a should be given to God, although this is not clearly stated in the text. The contribution which qrhskei,a makes to the overall picture of worship is by way of highlighting the aspect of external practice(s) in worship as this word has to do with external aspects of worship, and one which consists of ceremonies.39 Worship is not only an internal expression of one’s religious relationship with God; it also includes an external expression of that relationship which is visible and confirmatory of the devotion of the worshipper. In this sense, qrhskei,a is similar to proskune,w, which communicates external acts of submission and acknowledgment. The verb proskune,w however, appears to be more specific in that it has to do with bodily postures of prostration, bending or falling on one’s knees in recognition of the presence of God (in a religious context), whereas qrhskei,a seems to imply external aspects of worship on a general level. The word qrhskei,a expands our understanding of worship by pointing to the aspect of one’s religious relationship with God in outward action. All of these words which we have explored thus suggest that Paul did not conceive of worship as a solitary word with one meaning. Rather, it seems to be

266

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

the case that Paul viewed worship as a comprehensive phenomenon or description of the basic religious relationship of the human subject to the divine worshipped object communicated by a series of various words. All of these words are not worship by themselves, or in and of themselves, but individual constituent pieces that come together to form an orderly cohesive mosaic picture. The words we have surveyed speak of religious service to God sometimes metaphorically described in terms of sacrifice to highlight total submission to him. They also communicate the idea of reverencing and honoring God. They convey the notion of expressing one’s total submission and surrender to God by bodily gestures such as prostrating and bowing the knees. This is aimed at acknowledging his presence. These words speak of ownership and possession by God where the worshipper as a slave or servant is in total submission of allegiance to God their master. Other words convey the idea of serving God by means of external ceremonies or rites. These external actions affirm the relationship and service of the worshipper to God. We observed that certain words used by Paul are stronger than others in their definition of worship.40 We observed that the very strong words: latreu,w, latrei,a, and seba,zomai appear in contexts where God is the sole recipient of worship, and these words denote a religious service to the divine object (Rom 1:9, 25; 9:4; 12:1; Phil 3:3; 2 Tim 1:3). The religious context establishes a worship context, and this appears to fit with my proposed definition and criteria for worship. We observed that the words latreu,w, latrei,a, and seba,zomai are never used by Paul for the risen Jesus, but only for God.41 The word proskune,w is not as strong as latreu,w, latrei,a, and seba,zomai, because it can have a wide semantic range of meanings depending on the identity of the recipient to whom proskune,w applies. It can apply to God as we have seen in 1 Cor 14:25, and in such a context it denotes “worship” because it appears in a religious context, and this again appears to meet my definition and criteria for worship. The verb qrhskei,a is a hapax legomenon in the Pauline corpus and is mentioned in reference to angels, which involved a worship practice that is denounced by Paul. The weakest of the words Paul employs, douleu,w, can have numerous referents including God, but it does not necessarily mean worship although it can implicitly, when God is the intended object. I concluded chapter 4 by examining the subject of idolatry and how it connected with Paul’s view of worship. Idolatry by definition is the worship of idols. Idolatry to Paul is the very antithesis of the worship of God in that it dishonors and denigrates God, who is the only rightful recipient of worship by virtue of the fact that he is the creator of all (Rom 1:18–25). Idolatry for Paul is, in short, the worship of anything but God, the worship of creation or the creature over the creator (Rom 1:25). The heinous nature of this practice according to Paul is a grave one which can bar one’s entrance into the kingdom of God (1 Cor 5:10–11; 6:9; 10:7, 14; Gal 5:20; Eph 5:5; Col 3:5). The practice of idolatry always appears in a

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

| 267

religious context where idols served as representations of supposed divine entities. Various expressions or levels of action are rendered to idols such as giving religious service (latrei,a) and reverential awe (seba,zomai) to them (Rom 1:25). The fact that Paul addressed and raised the issue of idolatry in his letters demonstrates that the worship of God was important in his mind and that he would not tolerate any rivals. Another expression or level of action is that of sacrifice and offerings. Paul recognizes these practices as constituting a false form of worship as he sets out in 1 Cor 10:19–22. The Corinthian faith community in particular raised concerns of idolatry for Paul (1 Cor 8–10; 2 Cor 6:14–18). Paul equates the sacrifices offered to idols as sacrifices offered to demons. In order to make his point, Paul appealed to the concrete Christian practice and observation of the Eucharist. Paul reasoned that one who partakes of the Eucharist (table and cup of the Lord) cannot also partake of the food offered to idols / demons. The important works of Smith42 and Taussig43 have shown that in Paul’s social cultural world, the eating of meals was associated with identity markers and boundaries both socially and religiously. Worship would take place at table in a meal setting.44 This would indicate that Paul also perceived the celebration of the Eucharist to involve worship. Many of these first century meals would include oblations, which were poured out to various gods, and such acts were seen as worship. For this reason, Paul seeks to bar Christian believers from taking part in these social gatherings outside the faith community because they would involve compromise with their allegiance to the Lord. This indicates that at the heart of Paul’s concerns was worship. Idolatry becomes synonymous for Paul with false or empty worship. Paul does not deny that idols or anything else can be worshipped; he shows rather that it is a form of illegitimate worship. In arguing his point against idolatry, Paul employs a metaphor by making reference to the temple of God. He reminds the Corinthian believers that they are collectively the temple of God (1 Cor 3:16–17; Eph 2:21–22). Their individual bodies are also a temple of the Holy Spirit (1 Cor 6:19–20). When Paul addresses the subject of idolatry head on, he again uses the metaphor of the temple (2 Cor 6:14–18). In all three of these cases, the temple metaphor is used to emphasize the presence of God in the worshipping community. In 2 Cor 6:16–18 Paul shows that there is no compromise and common ground between Christian believers and idols, and he calls them to separate themselves from idols. Paul recalls the presence of God in the worshipping community and describes God as living in, and walking among his people. The assumption is made that God is intimately related to his people and that he is present to hear them, answer them, and receive the proper honor from them. The temple metaphor also communicates the idea of possession. Since the faith community is God’s temple or the temple of God, they are his own possession, and this raises the notion of allegiance to him. The notion of allegiance

268

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

to God by definition eliminates all other allegiances to other masters. Thus Paul argues from this that Christian believers cannot worship God and idols at the same time. Their allegiance and worship must be undivided. They are to worship God alone without exception. With the metaphor of the temple in terms of possession, Paul also reminds his worshipping community that they are sons and daughters, children of God (2 Cor 6:18), and as such, they are obligated to render honor and reverence to their heavenly parent, God. In chapter 5, I investigated the practical expressions or idioms for worship in Paul’s letters. I investigated particular actions and not specific concepts associated with worship as we saw in the language or words Paul used for “worship.” The words I investigated in this chapter are associated with worship and are not generally translated in English translations as “worship” as the words latreu,w, latrei,a, seba,zomai, proskune,w, and qrhskei,a have been. I noted that there was an overlap between the language of “worship” in Paul and the actions which we examined. An overlap between a concept or word for worship and a practical expression or action that denotes worship was observed in the study of the word proskune,w, which is one of the words usually translated “worship” (1 Cor 14:25). This word for “worship” at the same time carries the notion of action in terms of prostrating oneself and falling on one’s knees. The practical expressions which were explored in this chapter functioned more as subsets of the concepts associated with and translated as “worship.” Paul’s main aim for the believer is that everything they do should be done with an aim to the glory of God (1 Cor 10:31). I surveyed six practical expressions: invocation, prayer, wish prayers, hymns, baptism, and the Eucharist. When I examined the practical expression of invocation, I noted that the verb evpikale,w / “to call upon” is used both in the Greco-Roman sources and in the biblical texts to denote or express worship wherein the worshipper calls upon the name, or invokes the name of a god, gods, or God. This aspect of worship is attested by the appearance of the verb evpikale,w in the LXX in texts related to worship where the referent is the Lord.45 What I found to be significant in Paul’s use of evpikale,w is that whenever he used this verb in a context of worship, he always applied it to the risen Jesus as its object (Rom 10:9–14; 1 Cor 1:2; 2 Tim 2:22). Moreover, Paul not only applied this expression to the risen Jesus, but his source for doing so seemed to be the OT texts from the LXX where evpikale,w is used of God. Paul applies these texts and transfers them to the risen Jesus as we saw in Rom 10:13 where Paul explicitly cites Joel 2:32 (LXX Joel 3:5). In 1 Cor 1:2 Paul used similar language where Christian believers are described as those who call on the name of the Lord Jesus or invoke him in every place. The assumption in this text is that the risen Jesus is alive and present with the faith community and able to hear them when they invoke or call on his name.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

| 269

The very act of calling on the name of the Lord Jesus also assumes that he has the ability to respond, and in this way he is being acknowledged and honored as the source of the invocation. I noted in this study the close association between honor and worship. The act of invocation to the risen Jesus is used in reference to salvation (Rom 10:13), and as a descriptor of the gathered worship assembly (1 Cor 1:2). Invocation is also qualified in that those who call on the name of the Lord (Jesus) must do so from a “pure heart” (2 Tim 2:22). As our earliest Christian writer, Paul is the first to include the risen Jesus within a context of worship by making him the object of invocation in the faith community. The application of a technical expression for invoking God in the OT being applied to the risen Jesus brings him into the foray of Christian worship. The act of invocation by its communicative nature also overlaps with the expression of “prayer” as some scholars have noted.46 Thus the act of invoking the risen Jesus overlaps with “prayer” to the risen Jesus. In this respect, Paul appears to have, to borrow Hurtado’s terminology, a “binitarian” view of worship where both God and the risen Lord Jesus become the objects of Christian devotion (cf. 1 Cor 8:6). I concur with Aune’s assessment that Christian worship “can be understood as the reverent homage paid to God and Christ in the context of a Christian assembly.”47 Paul not only saw Christian believers as being in relationship to God, but he also saw Christian believers as being in relationship to the risen Jesus. In the investigation of prayer, we saw that this term carries a general communicative meaning in that it describes communication with God.48 The assumption in prayer is that God is present and able to hear the petitions of the worshipping community. We also discovered that the English word prayer like worship is not a univocal word for Paul. Paul did not have one particular and specific word to denote communication with God. While the word proseuch, appears as the dominant word for “prayer,”49 we found that Paul did not restrict himself to only this word. The important work of Robert Morgenthaler,50 lists sixteen various words for “prayer” which occur some 133 times in the entire Pauline corpus.51 Louw and Nida have also made the important observation concerning the multifaceted nature of the category of prayer.52 An example of the diversity of “prayer” words in Paul which I noted is the important and prominent word euvcariste,w / “to give thanks,” which figures as a prominent feature and component in Paul’s prefaces or salutations in his letters. In Phil 4:6 Paul associates a series of words (proseuch,, de,hsij, ai;thma, and euvcaristi,a) all of which denote communication with God. These various words can express various aspects related to prayer, which for Paul is essentially to speak to (proseuch,) God. Paul associates this act with other acts such as giving thanks (euvcaristi,a) to God, pleading or begging for something with a sense of urgency (de,hsij) from God, to request something (ai;thma) of God. The common

270

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

denominator that these words all share is that God is the intended referent and the source that can provide and respond. God is also acknowledged as the one who can grant what is being asked for. The picture that these various words also present is that of total dependence and submission on God, a theme that is an important component in worship. These communicative words function interchangeably and synonymously because they all have God as their referent. I also discussed various postures associated with prayer such as raising the hands and bending the knees. These postures are intended to communicate submission and dependence to God and acknowledgment of him. I explored a number of passages where God is the addressee of prayers (Rom 1:9–10; Phil 4:6; 2 Tim 1:3). I noted that in Rom 1:9–10 and 2 Tim 1:3 prayer is closely associated with latreu,w, a very strong word for “worship.” Paul does not call the act of addressing God latreu,w, but he associates the act with latreu,w. We see here an association of prayer with worship. We also discovered that the risen Jesus was also an addressee of prayer in the Pauline faith communities, both in a communal, and individual context. We saw the communal nature of addressing the risen Jesus in prayer, principally in the Maranatha phrase in 1 Cor 16:22. The Aramaic phrase in the imperatival vocative carries the meaning of “Our Lord come!” It is taken as a very early prayer by the Judean Christian community addressed to the risen Jesus to return at the parousia (cf. Rev 22:20). The faith community in Corinth by collectively uttering the maranatha, showed their complete dependence on the risen Jesus as Lord, and are petitioning him to return. At the same time that they are making this petition, they are also making an eschatological affirmation by way of an implicit reference to the parousia, that the risen Jesus will be the ultimate Lord. The aspect in worship that emerges from the maranatha prayer is that of complete dependence of the servants on their Lord as well as expectation of the advent of their Lord. They desire the presence of the Lord to be fully realized in person, thus their petition for his parousia. The maranatha prayer also assumes that the risen Jesus is alive, and that he can hear the request of the faith community to hasten his return. I also examined 2 Cor 12:8–10 where we encountered a unique text where Paul personally addressed the Lord who is Jesus, three times to remove an affliction, which he termed a “thorn in the flesh.” In this text, Paul employed the verb parakale,w, which means to call upon for help and is used outside of Paul in religious contexts to refer to communication with God or the gods. This verb is one of many words used to communicate the notion of “prayer,” although it is not the only one which supports my argument that prayer is multifaceted. Paul assumes that the risen Lord Jesus is alive, that he can hear him, and that he has the power to remove the thorn in the flesh, which is afflicting Paul. Paul offers no explanation or justification for his prayer to the risen Jesus but appears to expect his readers to

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

| 271

be familiar with this practice. This may imply that the Corinthian faith community in imitating Paul also engaged in individual prayers to the risen Jesus. We have seen that communal prayers to the risen Jesus were already practiced (1 Cor 1:2; 16:22), and thus to go from communal prayers to individual prayers to the risen Jesus would seem to be a logical deduction. When Paul receives the response from the risen Lord that he will not remove his thorn in the flesh, and that in Paul’s weakness the power of Christ is manifested, Paul accepts this as the divine will and intends to suffer afflictions for the sake of Christ. While prayer is usually addressed to God in Paul, we find in 2 Cor 12:8–10 Paul personally and individually praying to the risen Jesus. What is striking about this text is that Paul does not address God, but the risen Jesus, and this supposed theological tension has been a source of some debate among some scholars which I addressed.53 The identity of the “Lord” whom Paul addressed in 2 Cor 12:8–10 is best explained as the risen Jesus himself. I conclude from this that Paul believed that God and the risen Jesus could be addressed in prayer separately from each other. In short, prayers go be offered to either God or the risen Jesus. When I investigated Paul’s “wish prayers,” we saw that these type of “prayers” involve a desire or wish on the part of the petitioner for an individual, or for a group who are in his or her mind, that God would grant a certain benefaction to that individual or group. Wish prayers usually contain the word “may” in English translation and thus indicate the idea of a wish on the part of the one who prays. We examined these wish prayers in 1 and 2 Thessalonians. No particular word for “prayer” is used in the texts we studied (1 Thess 3:11–13; 2 Thess 2:16–17; 3:5). The idea that a wish prayer was present was based on both grammatical and contextual considerations in these passages. This suggests in the absence of any particular words that the basic idea of communication with God denotes an act of prayer. What was striking about these wish prayers was that they addressed both God and the risen Jesus conjointly (1 Thess 3:11; 2 Thess 2:16–17), and they directly addressed the risen Lord Jesus (1 Thess 3:12–13; 2 Thess 3:5). The early composition of 1 Thessalonians as Paul’s earliest letter suggests that the practice of addressing both God and the risen Jesus in prayer arises at a very early stage in the Christian faith community. The practice of addressing the risen Jesus directly has also been seen in Paul’s personal prayer in 2 Cor 12:8–10. Wish prayers also presume that the will of God and the risen Jesus are determinative of what will occur. We also saw in these texts the aspect of utter dependence on both God and the risen Jesus as the source for divine help and assistance. At the same time, both God and the risen Jesus are acknowledged as the source of help, and in this respect, honor is attributed to both. The rendering of honor in a religious context indicates worship takes place. This fits with the criteria that a religious context is axiomatic in order for worship to occur.

272

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

I then examined the subject of hymns. The singing of hymns was a feature of worship in antiquity. Paul does not mention hymns per se in his earlier letters, but he does mention the use of a psalm, which is generally taken as a spiritual song, as a feature of worship inter alia in the faith community (1 Cor 14:26). The singing of songs is only one feature of worship as Paul lists it along with teaching, revelation, tongues, and interpretation of tongues, all of which together with singing is meant to edify or build up the faith community. God is the implied referent who is acknowledged and therefore, honored. The singing of such songs occurs in the worshipping community and therefore grounds it in a worship context. Further expansion in the use of songs into psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs is seen in Eph 5:19 and Col 3:16. Ephesians 5:19 and Col 3:16, while grammatically similar, differ in respect to the referent or object who receives the level of action, in the former case it is the risen Lord Jesus, whereas in the latter, it is God. This demonstrates that both God and the risen Jesus were the object of hymns. The conjoining of both God and the risen Jesus by Paul as referents of a level of action in worship has already been seen in the case of wish prayers (1 Thess 3:11). A song or hymn is not worship itself, but I argued it functions as a vehicle or level of action whereby worship is expressed vocally by the faith community. Hymns become associated with worship when they are motivated by the right intention of the worshipper and proceed from the heart and are directed at God. They acknowledge God (or the risen Jesus) and thus serve as vehicles of praise or thanksgiving. In so doing they attribute honor to God, which is an important element in the worship paradigm. In this respect, a song or a hymn functions as a subset of worship. I then turned our attention to the practices of baptism and the Eucharist. I referred to them as substantive and tangible acts of worship because they are concrete and visible in their use and expression. They can be apprehended with the five senses. They also involve physical action on the part of the worshipper.”54 In baptism, water is used, and in the Eucharist, bread and wine are used. The materials or elements employed in these acts are physical in nature even though these acts also have a spiritual meaning to them. These practices are also external in nature in that they are visibly observed. They function as outward expressions. In the study of the language of worship, we saw that the word qrhskei,a was a word that had to do with the external aspects of religious devotion. This word demonstrates that one aspect of worship is to show one’s allegiance by external practices. While Paul does not apply qrhskei,a to baptism or the Eucharist, it seems to be the case that both baptism and the Eucharist function as external aspects of religious devotion. They both occur in a communal context which is religious, and therefore a worship context is established. Both baptism and the Eucharist are Christocentric in that Jesus and his death and resurrection are closely tied to these acts. When believers engage in these acts, they identify themselves with the risen Jesus.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

| 273

In baptism, believers are identified with Jesus in his death, burial, and resurrection (Rom 6:3–6), and have put on or clothed themselves with Christ (Gal 3:27). They are baptized in or into Jesus’ name (1 Cor 1:13). In the Eucharist, believers identify themselves with Jesus by sharing and participating in his body and blood (1 Cor 10:16). While one’s identification with Jesus is seen in baptism, we also noted that the notion of ownership and allegiance was also connected with baptism. Paul taught that baptized believers became doulwqe,ntej de. tw/| qew/| / “enslaved to God” or “slaves of God” (Rom 6:22; RSV, ESV). The idea of being baptized in someone’s name implied that one belonged to the person so named.55 To the extent that baptism evokes the idea of ownership by God it can imply worship in that the baptized person becomes the possession or ownership of a new master, and thus his or her allegiance in service is now to their new master. At the same time, this ownership involves acknowledging the new master by showing honor to him. In an implicit way, service to God, which is an element of worship as we saw in the verbs latreu,w and douleu,w, is being communicated through the vehicle of baptism. Another important feature I noted was that baptism also involved “the invocation of Jesus’ name”56 and the confession that “Jesus is Lord” (Rom 10:9). If the act of invoking and confessing Jesus as Lord is associated and tied into baptism, then the act of baptism does in effect become an expression, a level of action whereby the risen Jesus is being acknowledged and honored. We also saw that when Paul dealt with the Eucharist, it first appears in a section dealing with an external problem in which Paul is repudiating idolatry among the Corinthians which is antithetical to the worship of God (1 Cor 10:14–22). Thus the Eucharist in its first reference in Paul (and the NT) appears in a worship context. Paul uses the Eucharist as a tangible example of the fellowship which believers have with the risen Jesus and that that fellowship cannot be compromised with idols, which are mere props for demons according to Paul. Paul also speaks about the Eucharist in the context of believers gathering or coming together (1 Cor 11:17–18, 20, 33–34), an expression which appears to be associated with gathering for a religious purpose.57 I noted in my criteria that a religious context is axiomatic in order for worship to occur. If the act is not performed in a religious context, worship does not take place. Since the Eucharist involves a gathering for a religious purpose, worship inevitably occurs. Paul grounds the Eucharist in a worship context in his recounting of the words of Jesus at the Last Supper where he gave “thanks” (euvcariste,w) to God (1 Cor 11:24). I demonstrated that the giving of euvcariste,w functioned as an acknowledgment of praise to God, and hence this word is associated with worship.58 In this respect, Paul presents Jesus himself in the context of worship to God. In the observance of the Eucharist, Christian believers are in a sense reenacting what Jesus did in giving euvcariste,w to God. The worship context of the Eucharist was also seen in its commemorative aspect where Jesus’

274

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

death was remembered. This commemorative act in recalling the death of Jesus I noted had parallels with the OT theme of remembering YHWH in sacred meals. I also noted based on the important studies of Dennis Smith and Hal Taussig on the significance of meals in the Greco-Roman world that worship also occurred at the table during the meal and that this most likely happened also at Christian meals.59 Paul never calls the practice of baptism or the Eucharist “worship.” Paul associates them with worship by drawing on various elements related to worship such as identification, ownership, allegiance, confession, invocation, and thanksgiving. In this way, Paul speaks of baptism and the Eucharist as vehicles through which worship is rendered. The use of these rituals in a religious context firmly places them within a worship category. Both baptism and the Eucharist in and of themselves are not worship. When the faith community motivates these tangible expressions with the right intentions, then they function as vehicles of worship. In this study, I examined in chapters 4 and 5 the words or language Paul used for “worship” and the practical expressions which Paul employed to communicate worship. Based on my findings I have reached the following conclusion: In Paul’s letters and in his vocabulary, there exists no one standard word for “worship,” but rather a series of words which he employed to communicate one’s relationship to God. For Paul worship is a comprehensive understanding of the basic religious relationship of the human subject to the divine worshipped object. In addition to using various words for worship, Paul also employed a number of other words and idioms that denoted practical expressions which functioned as vehicles through which worship was rendered. In this respect, these practical expressions are associated with worship and also function as a subset of worship. Worship can be exercised both individually, or collectively in a communal context. Worship can be internal, proceeding from the heart, but it can also be external, in its outward expressions. Worship for Paul is multifaceted and is like a mosaic. It is not made up of one whole piece, but rather it is a complete picture made up of many individual constituent pieces, which collectively give shape, meaning, and definition to the overall picture of worship. The words for worship and the practical expressions through which worship is realized are established by means of levels of action which are directed to God. I also conclude that God is the usual referent or object of the words and language Paul employs for worship. Paul never applies the words latreu,w, latrei,a, seba,zomai, proskune,w, and qrhskei,a to the risen Jesus. He does apply the word douleu,w to the risen Jesus (Rom 12:11; 14:18; 16:18), as well as to God (1 Thess 1:9), but this word has a wide semantic range and does not necessarily carry the meaning of “worship,” unless the context shows that it overlaps with worship as 1  Thess 1:9 clearly does. The contexts of Rom 12:11; 14:18; 16:18 are not very clear to establish an overlap with worship.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

| 275

In the case of the practical expressions of worship, we found that Paul applied prayer, wish prayers, songs, and hymns to God. In this area, Paul applied invocation, prayer, and wish prayers to the risen Jesus. He also applied the substantive and tangible expressions of baptism and the Eucharist primarily to the risen Jesus as they are particularly associated with him. While Paul does not apply songs and hymns to the risen Jesus in his earlier letter of 1 Cor 14:26 (the direct object is not clearly specified in the text), it is clear that he does so in the later letter of Eph 5:19 (cf. Col 3:16). I further conclude that in incorporating the risen Jesus as the object of these practical expressions for worship, Paul is the first Christian writer to elevate the risen Jesus to such a high status and to place him within a framework of Christian worship. Paul concerns himself primarily (but not exclusively) with the post-Easter Jesus, i.e., the risen Jesus. It can be concluded from the way Paul treated and included the risen Jesus in Christian worship that he is related in an important way to Christian worship and its expressions. I thus conclude from this that my hypothesis regarding the place and relation of the risen Jesus to Christian worship as an object of worship has been justified by my findings. I present the following figure below as an illustration and breakdown of worship in Paul. The lines in this figure indicate an interconnectedness between the words and expressions in the overall scheme of worship. I briefly make the following remarks by way of a recapitulation of the points established above. Worship in Paul is primarily viewed in terms of words or language as we see in the first row above. These words communicate various aspects related to one’s relationship with God. These words communicate aspects like religious service, reverence and awe, prostration and falling on one’s knees, being

WORSHIP

Invocation

latreu,w / latrei,a

seba,zomai

proskune,w

douleu,w

qrhskei,a

Prayer

Maranatha

Wish Prayer

Hymns /Songs

Bowing / Prostrating

Baptism

Eucharist

Figure 1. Breakdown of Pauline worship words

Confession / Acknowledgment

276

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

in service to a master who owns and possesses you, religiously serving by means of external rites or ceremonies. These words also inherently carry ideas of allegiance, loyalty, dependence, surrender, total submission, ownership, acknowledgment, honor, and respect, among other things, all of which denote levels of action towards God. Secondly, after the words and language for worship we come to a subset in the second row which is composed of practical expressions. These words are associated with worship in that they function as vehicles. What associates these words with worship is their referent, which in Paul is usually God but also the risen Jesus. These practical expressions also inherently carry ideas such as giving thanks, praise, supplication, making requests, petitions, appealing, and singing, among other things, all of which also function as levels of action towards God or the risen Jesus, or both. Thirdly, after the subset of practical expressions we come to another subset in the third row which differs in that these expressions are tangible, material, visible, and expressed physically with substantive elements (water, bread, wine). These two rituals which express an external level of action are also associated with worship as they also function as a vehicle for worship. They also communicate the ideas of identification, ownership, allegiance, total submission, dependence, confession, invocation, and acknowledgment. Together these individual and constituent words and expressions contribute to form a composite mosaic called worship. I brought this study to an end by examining the purpose and ultimate goal of worship in Paul. I did this by examining the Carmen Christi (Phil 2:6–11) and investigating particularly the last three verses (Phil 2:9–11). The Carmen is divided into two parts with two themes represented by the movement of descent and ascent. The first part describes the descent of the preexistent Christ (Phil 2:6–8), and the second describes the ascent or exaltation of Christ (Phil 2:9–11). In the first section, Jesus is the active subject, and in the second section God is the active subject who exalts Jesus and bestows on him the name above every name. This action on the part of God is the divine response to the humiliation, suffering, and obedient service of Jesus. We noted from the grammar of the text that the divine response of God in exalting Jesus was intended and purposed to achieve the result of the cosmic universal acknowledgment of the lordship of Jesus expressed by two levels of action. First, that of bowing, and secondly, that of confessing that “Jesus Christ is Lord” with the consequential result that God will be ultimately and maximally glorified. That the language of worship is being used of the exalted Jesus in Phil 2:9–11 seems to be confirmed by several points. First, the background to this universal acclamation and bowing of every knee to the exalted Jesus (Phil 2:10–11) appears to come from the OT text of LXX Isa 45:23. In this text ku,rioj (YHWH; MT) receives universal submission by the bending of every knee and the

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

| 277

confession of allegiance by every tongue. The text of Isa 45:23 is a religious one, and I have argued in my definition of worship that worship occurs only in a religious context. If Isa 45:23 is the base text behind Phil 2:9–11, then it would seem to follow that Paul is intending a religious context as well. Paul cites Isa 45:23 in Rom 14:11 where God is clearly the divine object, and this reinforces my position that the context must necessarily also be religious. The context of Phil 2:9–11 also appears to be religious because God is the ultimate object of reference in verse 11. This would seem to suggest that verses 9–10 are also religious, and if so, worship occurs. I noted that the aspects of bending the knee and confession communicate the ideas of allegiance, surrender, acknowledgment, and total submission, which are elements found within the category of worship in that they ascribe honor to the object. None of the words Paul used for worship in his letters (latreu,w, latrei,a, seba,zomai, douleu,w, proskune,w, and qrhskei,a) are used in the climax of the Carmen (Phil 2:9–11) with reference to God or the exalted Jesus. I have already shown that the frequency of words for worship in Paul are very sparse and that Paul did not restrict worship to only one word. What determines worship in the Carmen is the religious context and the levels of action which take place. This confirms the use of my definition and criteria for worship in this study. I conclude from this that the exalted Jesus is an object of worship in the Carmen. This, however, is not the conclusion that Paul wished to achieve in the Carmen. The Carmen does not end with the exalted Jesus. In the Carmen, the exalted Jesus does not replace God or take worship from God. God is worshipped through the worship of the exalted Jesus. The worship which is given to the exalted Jesus does not usurp the worship of God, nor does it rival the worship of God; it rather complements the worship of God and facilitates it. The eschatological grande finale for Paul will finally be realized in its fullness with the ultimate and universal glorification of God. This is the language of worship. We have seen in this study that the concept of do,xa / “glory” (Phil 2:11) is associated with “honor” and “respect”60 and also “praise.”61 Worship involves the rendering of honor, respect, and praise to God by way of acknowledgment (cf. Rom 1:21). Neyrey has made the important observation that honor in the ancient world was a claim of worth, value, and respect that had to be publicly acknowledged.62 We see in the climax of the Carmen that there is an acknowledgment, but it is a universal acknowledgment which involves the bending of every knee in surrender and submission, and the confession of every tongue that “Jesus Christ is Lord” and that this will be to the glory, honor, respect, and praise of God the Father. Since these words convey a level of action in which worship takes place, it can be asserted that what Paul is communicating in the climax of the Carmen is that the act of bending the knee, and the confession that Jesus is Lord, will

278

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

result in the universal worship of God. According to Paul, God has purposed that his ultimate glorification, his worship, will be achieved through the worship of the exalted Jesus. The importance and centrality of the risen Jesus in relation to Christian worship, which I have argued from the beginning of this study, is clearly evident here. God cannot be ultimately and maximally glorified, according to Paul, without, or apart from the exalted Jesus. Paul thus sees worship from a teleological perspective as fulfilled eschatologically in the ultimate universal expression of honor that is given to God by the entire cosmos through the agency of the exalted Jesus. This for Paul is the essence and meaning of worship.

7.2. Further Considerations It is my hope that this book has served as a contribution to the field of early Christian worship and the place of the risen Jesus in the worship setting of the Pauline faith communities. It is also my hope that this book can function as a springboard to launch further studies in the area of worship in other texts of the NT outside of Paul. The subject of devotion or worship of Jesus in particular has been an issue of interest and becoming even more so now among scholars as seen in the seminal works of Larry Hurtado and Richard Bauckham. More scholarly work in this area would be in my estimation an asset to better understanding early Christian origins, especially in relation to its Jewish matrix. With this advancement in research, it is my conviction that our understanding of early Christian worship and the relation of the risen Jesus to it, would only deepen and increase and give us a fresh appreciation for the most basic expression of the relationship of the human to God, namely: worship.

NOTES

Chapter One: Introduction to Worship in the Pauline Communities 1. From this point onward I will refer to the New Testament by the abbreviation NT. 2. On Paul and first-century writing and letter composition, see Randolph E. Richards, Paul and First-Century Letter Writing: Secretaries, Composition and Collection (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2004); M. Luther Stirewalt, Paul: The Letter Writer (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2003). 3. For a brief listing, see Oscar Cullmann, Early Christian Worship (Studies in Biblical Theology  10; London: SCM, 1953); C.  F.  D. Moule, Worship in the New Testament (Ecumenical Studies in Worship  9; London: Lutterworth Press, 1961); D.  Gerhard Delling, Worship in the New Testament (trans. Percy Scott; London: Darton, Longman and Todd, 1962); C. C. Richardson, “Worship in New Testament Times, Christian,” in Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible, 4:883–94; Ralph P. Martin, Worship in the Early Church (Westwood, NJ: Fleming H. Revell, 1964); Ferdinand Hahn, The Worship of the Early Church (trans. David E. Green and John Reumann; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1973); Allen Cabaniss, Pattern in Early Christian Worship (Macon, GA: Mercer University Press, 1989); David  E. Aune, “Worship, Early Christian,” in Anchor Bible Dictionary (New York: Doubleday, 1992), 6:973–89. Aune provides a good and comprehensive bibliography in 6:987–89; Paul F. Bradshaw, The Search for the Origins of Christian Worship (London: SPCK, 1992); Paul  F. Bradshaw, Reconstructing Early Christian Worship

280

4.

5.

6.

7. 8. 9.

10. 11. 12. 13.

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

(London: SPCK, 2009); Larry  W. Hurtado, At the Origins of Christian Worship: The Context and Character of Earliest Christian Devotion (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000); Jerome H. Neyrey, Give God the Glory: Ancient Prayer and Worship in Cultural Perspective (Grand Rapids; Cambridge, UK: Eerdmans, 2007). An example of this can be seen in D. A. Carson, ed., Teach Us to Pray: Prayer in the Bible and the World (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1990); Richard N. Longenecker, ed., Into God’s Presence: Prayer in the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2001). A recent example of this can be seen in Gerald L. Borchert, Worship in the New Testament: Divine Mystery and Human Response (St. Louis: Chalice Press, 2008), which attempts to cover the subject of worship in the entire NT. Borchert’s work in this case, however, appears to be more of a devotional commentary on the NT than a serious academic analysis of worship in the NT. For a review of this book by the writer, see Tony Costa, review of Worship in the New Testament: Divine Mystery and Human Response, by Gerald L. Borchert, Review of Biblical Literature, March 28, 2009, http://www.bookreviews.org/pdf/6648_7206.pdf. See Martin, Worship in the Early Church, with supplied bibliography in Gerald  F. Hawthorne, Ralph  P. Martin, and Daniel  G. Reid, eds., Dictionary of Paul and His Letters (Downers Grove, IL; Leicester, UK: Inter-Varsity Press, 1993), 982–91. The only reference to a general study of worship in Paul that this writer has located is that of Charles Mann Luxmoore, Paul on Worship (Bradford, UK: Needed Truth Publishing Office, 1920). This text is a booklet composed of forty-eight pages, and the approach to Paul and worship is mainly an ecclesiastical and theological one. Luxmoore was a member of the Christian denomination of the Plymouth Brethren. Jerome Neyrey states that “[t]he library of scholarly materials on prayer and worship is particularly rich.” Neyrey, Give God the Glory, 1. While this is certain on a broad level, less attention has been given to exploring the theme of worship specifically in Paul and its relation to the place of the risen Jesus within the context of Christian worship. Nijay K. Gupta, Worship That Makes Sense to Paul: A New Approach to the Theology and Ethics of Paul’s Cultic Metaphors (Berlin; New York: Walter de Gruyter, 2010). Gupta says, “This book examines the apostle Paul’s cultic metaphors with a view towards determining their theological import.” Gupta, Worship that Makes Sense, 1. F. L. Cross, ed., The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church (London: Oxford University Press, 1957). No entry for worship was found in the later third edition of this work in F.  L. Cross and E.  A. Livingstone, eds., Dictionary of the Christian Church, 3rd  ed. (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson; London: Oxford University Press, 1997). James D. G. Dunn, The Theology of Paul the Apostle (Grand Rapids; Cambridge, UK: Eerdmans, 1998). Dunn does not have worship listed in his index of subjects at the end of Theology of Paul the Apostle. Roland Gebauer, Das Gebet bei Paulus (Basel: Brunnen, 1989). Peter T. O’Brien, “Ephesians 1: An Unusual Introduction to a New Testament Letter,” NTS  25 (1979): 504–16; Peter  T. O’Brien, Introductory Thanksgivings in the Letters of Paul (NovTSup  49; Leiden: Brill, 1977); Peter  T. O’Brien, “Romans 8:26, 27: A Revolutionary Approach to Prayer?” Reformed Theological Review 46 (1987): 65–73;

NOTES

14. 15. 16.

17.

18.

19. 20.

21.

22. 23.

| 281

Peter T. O’Brien, “Thanksgiving and the Gospel in Paul,” NTS 21 (1974–1975): 144–55; Peter T. O’Brien, “Thanksgiving within the Structure of Pauline Theology,” in Pauline Studies (ed. Donald A. Hagner and Murray J. Harris; Exeter, UK: Paternoster; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980), 50–66. Gordon P. Wiles, Paul’s Intercessory Prayers: The Significance of the Intercessory Prayer Passages in the Letters of St. Paul (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1974). Contra Neyrey, Give God the Glory, 1. W. B. Hunter “Prayer,” DPL, 726. Hunter attributes this truncating of worship material in Pauline studies to “on-going scholarly misgivings about the apostolic authorship of 2 Thessalonians, the Prison Letters and the Pastorals.” Hunter, “Prayer,” DPL, 727. Hunter does not explain why this is the case that Pauline worship material is truncated. Even without 2 Thess, the Prison Letters, and the Pastorals, the proto-Pauline letters for the sake of argument still offer a substantive amount of information pertinent to worship. On the formation of the Pauline faith communities or churches, see Richard S. Ascough, What Are They Saying about the Formation of Pauline Churches? (New York: Paulist Press, 1998). Birger Gerhardsson notes that since Paul claims to be an eyewitness to the resurrected Christ (1  Cor 9:1; 15:8), it is on the risen Christ that Paul places his focus. Birger Gerhardsson, Memory and Manuscript: Oral Tradition and Written Transmission in Rabinic Judaism and Early Christianity (rev.  ed.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), 262–323. On the importance of the place of Jesus within the Pauline letters, see Gordon D. Fee, Pauline Christology: An Exegetical-Theological Study (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2007). For a full study of Christology in Paul, see Fee, Pauline Christology; John  A. Ziesler, Pauline Christianity (rev. ed.; Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, 1990). For a full study in the area of the resurrection of Jesus, see N. T. Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God (London: SPCK, 2003); Dale C. Allison, Resurrecting Jesus: The Earliest Christian Tradition and Its Interpreters (New York: T  &  T Clark, 2005). All of Paul’s ‘authentic’ letters refer to the resurrection of Jesus, or at least allude to it, with the exception of Philemon. C. F. Evans, Resurrection and the New Testament (London: SCM Press, 1970), 1. In all the ‘disputed letters,’ the resurrection of Jesus is mentioned or alluded to with the exception of 2 Thessalonians and Titus. L. J. Kreitzer, “Resurrection,” DPL, 806. C. F. Evans, Resurrection and the New Testament, 1. The significance and centrality of the resurrection of Jesus is seen in the words of A. M. Ramsey, who asserts unequivocally that “Christian theism is Resurrection theism.” A. M. Ramsey, The Resurrection of Christ (London: Centenary Press, 1945), 7. K. H. Rengstorf comments that the resurrection of Jesus is “the basis of the specifically Christian belief in God.” K. H. Rengstorf, Die Auferstehung Jesu: Form, Art und Sinn der urchristlichen Osterbotschaft (Witten-Ruhr: Luther-Verlag, 1960), 37. Johannes Weiss, The History of Primitive Christianity, trans. F. C. Grant, 2 vols. (New York: Wilson-Erickson, 1937). Maurice Goguel, The Birth of Christianity, trans. H. C. Snape (New York: Macmillan, 1953); Maurice Goguel, La foi à la résurrection de Jésus dans le christianisme primitif (Paris: Leroux, 1933).

282

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

24. Floyd V. Filson, Jesus Christ the Risen Lord (New York; Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1956). 25. Filson, Jesus Christ the Risen Lord, 29. Filson also argued that all Christology is interpreted in light of the resurrection of Jesus (31). 26. I will use the textual critical method only where textual variants appear in the texts under study. I will treat these textual variants only in endnotes. 27. For other interpretive methodologies in New Testament studies, see A. B. Du Toit, ed., Focusing on the Message: New Testament Hermeneutics, Exegesis and Methods (Pretoria, South Africa: Protea Press, 2009); W.  Egger, How to Read the New Testament: An Introduction to Linguistic and Historical-Critical Methodology (ed. Hendrikus Boers; Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1996); J.  B. Green, ed., Hearing the New Testament: Strategies for Interpretation (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995); D. A. Black, Linguistics for Students of New Testament Greek (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995); G. D. Fee, New Testament Exegesis (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1993); M. Silva, Biblical Words and Their Meaning: An Introduction to Lexical Semantics (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994); B. J. Malina, The New Testament World: Insights from Cultural Anthropology (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1993); J.  H. Elliott, A Home for the Homeless: A Sociological Exegesis of 1 Peter, Its Situation and Strategy (London: SCM, 1982); R. Rohrbaugh, ed., The Social Sciences and New Testament Interpretation (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1996). 28. In what follows, I am dependent on notes for class discussions taken from Jan van der Watt (course, Exegesis: An Approach, Radboud University Nijmegen, Netherlands, 2001). 29. The value and importance of the social-cultural method is discussed in Jerome H. Neyrey, Paul, In Other Words: A Cultural Reading of His Letters (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1990). See also Bruce J. Malina and Jerome Neyrey, Portraits of Paul: An Archaeology of Ancient Personality (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1996); Jerome Murphy-O’Connor, Paul the Letter-Writer: His World, His Options, His Skills (Good News Studies 41; Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1995). For a more general socialcultural approach to the entire NT, see Neyrey, Give God the Glory. 30. Luke Timothy Johnson, Religious Experience in Earliest Christianity: A Missing Dimension in New Testament Studies (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1998). 31. Johnson, Religious Experience in Earliest Christianity, 12. See his full discussion on pp. 12–26. Johnson states his position as follows: “Beginning with the observation that the dominant paradigms for studying early Christianity tend to miss its specifically religious character, I argue the need for a phenomenological approach to religious experience in early Christianity” (vii). 32. There are other words that appear in the Pauline corpus of which I make the following comments: The word se,basma appears in 2  Thess 2:4 and means an “object of worship” but also refers to a sanctuary or place of worship, including altars and statues (Acts 17:23). J. P. Louw and E. A. Nida, eds., Louw-Nida Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament Based on Semantic Domains (2nd ed.; New York: United Bible Societies, 1988), 53.54–55; Joseph H. Thayer, The New Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1981), 572. I will return to this particular word below where I address the object of worship as it is germane to that section. In Col 2:23,

NOTES

33.

34. 35.

36.

| 283

the word evqeloqrhski,a appears and means “self-imposed religion” and “arbitrary worship . . . worship which one devises and prescribes for himself.” Louw and Nida, GreekEnglish Lexicon, 53.12; Thayer, New Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon, 168. The KJV and ASV translate this word as “will worship,” and the ESV and NASB translate it “self-made religion.” The Vulgate uses “superstitio” to translate this word. I will return to this word as well in the course of this study. There is the noun euvse,beia, which appears ten times in the Pastoral Letters (1 Tim 2:2; 3:16; 4:7–8 [2x]; 6:3, 5–6 [2x], 11; 2 Tim 3:5; Titus 1:1), which means “piety, godliness, religion.” F. W. Gingrich and F. W. Danker, Shorter Lexicon of the Greek New Testament (2nd ed.; Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1983), 81. Also the noun qeose,beia appearing only once in 1 Tim 2:10 and is defined as “reverence for God, piety, religion.” Gingrich and Danker, Shorter Lexicon of the Greek New Testament, 89. And also the verb euvsebe,w appearing once in 1 Tim 5:4, “Show piety toward.” Gingrich and Danker, Shorter Lexicon of the Greek New Testament, 81. This verb is also used in Act 17:23 for “worship.” Generally, in the Pastorals euvse,beia denotes an outward expression of Christian faith or “a particular manner of life.” See W. Foerster, TDNT 7:182–83. Outside of the Pauline corpus there are other words used for worship in the NT such as the following: se,bw, “to revere,” which is used of God (Matt 15:9; Mark 7:7; Acts 16:14; 18:7, 13) and a goddess (Acts 19:27). Thayer, New Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon, 572. There is also the word qerapeu,w, which has as its first meaning the idea of healing or curing and, secondarily, can mean serve or render service, and it appears in Act 17:25. Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 23.139; 35.19. In Luke 14:10, the word do,xa is translated “worship” in the KJV. By “material or concrete dimension” in these substantive and tangible actions of worship in Paul, I mean the use of the physical elements of water in baptism and the use of bread and wine in the Eucharist. On the Pauline literary corpus, see Stanley E. Porter, ed., The Pauline Canon (Pauline Studies 1; Leiden: Brill, 2004). For the chronological order of the proto- and deutero-Pauline letters with their approximate dates of composition, see Wayne A. Meeks and John T. Fitzgerald, eds., The Writings of St. Paul: Annotated Texts Reception and Criticism (2nd ed.; New York: W. W. Norton, 2007), v. The use of the disputed letters are valuable from the perspective generally held in scholarship that they were possibly written by Pauline groups, schools, or communities or possibly a Pauline pupil or pupils. They represent in John Ziesler’s words “a second wave of Paulinism.” Ziesler, Pauline Christianity, 127. See also F.  F. Bruce, “Some Thoughts on Paul and Paulinism,” Vox Evangelica 7 (1971): 5–16. They thus function as the first Pauline commentaries available on what these groups/communities/pupil(s) believed about what Paul taught and said, and in that respect they are valuable to this study of Paul. They also help to indicate the direction in which various Pauline ideas flowed and how they were being interpreted by these communities following Paul’s death. For a brief but thorough treatment of the disputed or deutero-Pauline letters, see Raymond E. Brown, An Introduction to the New Testament (Anchor Bible Reference

284

37.

38. 39.

40.

41. 42.

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

Library; New York: Doubleday, 1997), 585–89. I acknowledge nevertheless that there remains some disagreement among several scholars as to the true Pauline authorship of some of these “disputed” letters. Gordon D. Fee considers Ephesians and 2 Thessalonians as Pauline. See Gordon D. Fee, To What End Exegesis? (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans; Vancouver: Regent College Publishing, 2001); also see Luke Timothy Johnson, Letters to Paul’s Delegates (Valley Forge: Trinity Press International, 1996); R. W. Wall, “Pauline Authorship and the Pastoral Epistles: A Response to S. E. Porter,” Bulletin for Biblical Research 5 (1995): 125–28; and Stanley E. Porter, “Pauline Authorship and the Pastoral Epistles: A Response to R. W. Wall’s Response,” Bulletin for Biblical Research 6 (1996): 133–38. Bas Van Os notes that some of Paul’s letters such as Galatians “was carried to different churches to be read aloud in the communities as if Paul was present (cf. 1 Cor 5:3).” Bas Van Os, “The Jewish Recipients of Galatians,” in Paul: Jew, Greek, and Roman (ed. Stanley E. Porter; PAST 5; Leiden: Brill, 2008), 59. From texts such as 1 Thess 5:27 (cf. Col 4:16; Polycarp, Phil. 3:2), Paul expected his letters to be read aloud before the faith community. In this respect the reading aloud of the letters of Paul embodied as it were his very presence among the worshipping communities and functioned as his authoritative address to them. See also Michael F. Bird, Introducing Paul: The Man, His Mission and His Message (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2008), 13. Ralph P. Martin, “Aspects of Worship in the New Testament Church,” Vox Evangelica 2 (1963): 13. From a text critical point of view, Wilhelm Egger argues that the scholarly analysis of “pre-Pauline tradition” in the Pauline letters is arrived at primarily by the use and application of tradition criticism. Wilhelm Egger, How to Read the New Testament: An Introduction to Linguistic and Historical-Critical Methodology (ed. Hendrikus Boers; Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1996), 168–69. The following are considered pre-Pauline confessional formulae: Rom 3:25; 4:25; 5:6, 8; 8:32; 14:15; 1 Cor 8:11; 15:3; 2 Cor 5:14–15; Gal 1:4; 2:20; 1 Thess 5:10; cf. Eph 5:2, 25; 1 Tim 2:6; Titus 2:14. See Dunn, Theology of Paul, 174–77; E. Earle Ellis, “Traditions in 1 Corinthians,” NTS 32 (1986): 481–502. “I handed on to you” (pare,dwka), “what I also received” (pare,labon): 1 Cor 11:23; 15:3. For a detailed discussion on the Dominical Sayings (or “Sayings of Jesus”) and the scholarly debate around them, see Seyoon Kim, “Jesus, Sayings of,” DPL, 474–92. Kim provides a very helpful and extensive biography on the subject; Seyoon Kim, Paul and the New Perspective: Second Thoughts on the Origin of Paul’s Gospel (Grand Rapids; Cambridge, UK: Eerdmans, 2002), 259–92. See also Christopher Tuckett, Christology and the New Testament: Jesus and His Earliest Followers (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2001), 43–45; C. K. Barrett, A Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians (Harper’s New Testament Commentaries, ed. Henry Chadwick; New York; Evanston: Harper and Row, 1968), 264–66; and Richard Bauckham, Jesus and the Eyewitnesses: The Gospels as Eyewitness Testimony (Grand Rapids; Cambridge, UK: Eerdmans, 2006), 266–69. On the relevance and relationship of the Pauline material to the historical Jesus, see Nicholas Taylor, “Paul and the Historical Jesus Quest,” Neotestamentica 37.1 (2003): 105–26.

NOTES

| 285

43. Gordon D. Fee, Paul’s Letter to the Philippians (NICNT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995), 44–45. Fee further notes that whether a passage is pre-Pauline or not “is a moot point, which cannot be proved one way or the other” (45). Charles Cousar similarly reasons, “the traditional material [in the case of the Carmen Christi; Phil 2:6–11] has become ‘Pauline.’” Charles B. Cousar, A Theology of the Cross: The Death of Jesus in the Pauline Letters (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1990), 17.

Chapter Two: The Problem of Defining Worship 1. Compare this with the later narrative writing of Acts by Luke. We are presented with a more descriptive picture of the early Christian worshipping community in Acts 2:41–42 where early Christians are described as adhering to the apostles’ teaching, fellowship, the breaking of bread, and the prayers. On the theme of worship in Acts, see Daniel K. Falk, “Jewish Prayer Literature and the Jerusalem Church in Acts,” in The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting (ed. Richard Bauckham; Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting 4; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans; Carlisle, UK: Paternoster, 1995), 267–301. 2. Martin, Worship in the Early Church, 134. Martin also states that there is no set order of service in the entire NT. Richard Hays, likewise asserts: “Clearly there was no fixed order of service.” Richard B. Hays, First Corinthians (Interpretation; Louisville: John Knox Press, 1997), 241. 3. Aune, “Worship, Early Christian,” ABD 6:974. The earliest extrabiblical texts dealing with a format of Christian worship are the Didache, edited in the early second century CE, and Justin Martyr’s First Apology, dated to the mid-second century. On the Didache and First Apology as a format of Christian worship, see Neyrey, Give God the Glory, 206–44. 4. On the phenomenological approach, see Rudolph Otto, The Idea of the Holy: An Inquiry into the Non-Rational Factor in the Idea of the Divine and Its Relation to the Rational (trans. John W. Harvey; London: H.  Milford; Oxford University Press, 1923); G.  Van der Leeuw, Religion in Essence and Manifestation: A Study in Phenomenology(2 vols., trans. J. E. Turner; New York: Harper and Row, 1963); M. Eliade, Myth and Reality, trans. W. R. Trask (New York: Harper and Row, 1963); M. Eliade, Patterns in Comparative Religion (trans. R. Sheed; New York: World Publishing, 1963); W. B. Kristensen, The Meaning of Religion: Lectures in Phenomenology of Religion (trans. J. B. Carman; The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1960); W.  Proudfoot, Religious Experience (Berkeley: University of Berkeley Press, 1985); and Aune, “Worship, Early Christian,” ABD 6:974–75. 5. On Paul’s religious background and ties to Judaism, see Martin Hengel, The Pre-Christian Paul (trans. J. Bowden; London: SCM Press; Philadelphia: Trinity Press International, 1991); and A. Andrew Das, Paul and the Jews (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2003). 6. Aune, “Worship, Early Christian,” ABD 6:978. See also Martin, Worship in the Early Church, 11, 18–27. 7. J.  A. Smith, “The Ancient Synagogue, the Early Church and Singing,” Music and Letters 65 (1984):1–16.

286

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

8. Oscar Cullmann, Early Christian Worship (Studies in Biblical Theology  10; London: SCM, 1953). 9. C.  F.  D. Moule, Worship in the New Testament (Ecumenical Studies in Worship  9; London: Lutterworth Press, 1961). 10. D. Gerhard Delling, Worship in the New Testament (trans. Percy Scott; London: Darton, Longman and Todd, 1962). 11. Ralph  P. Martin, Worship in the Early Church (Westwood, NJ: Fleming  H. Revell, 1964); Ralph P. Martin, “Worship,” in Dictionary of Paul and His Letters (ed. Gerald F. Hawthorne, Ralph P. Martin, and Daniel G. Reid; Downers Grove, IL; Leicester, UK: Inter-Varsity Press, 1993), 982–91. 12. Ferdinand Hahn, The Worship of the Early Church (trans. David E. Green and John Reumann; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1973). 13. David  E. Aune, “Worship, Early Christian,” in Anchor Bible Dictionary (New York: Doubleday, 1992), 6:973–89. 14. For other scholars who have written on early Christian worship, see G. Bornkamm, Early Christian Experience (London: SCM Press, 1969); Alexander B. Macdonald, Christian Worship in the Primitive Church (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1934); Bradshaw, Reconstructing Early Christian Worship; Bradshaw, Search for the Origins of Christian Worship; Cabaniss, Pattern in Early Christian Worship; Borchert, Worship in the New Testament; Hurtado, At the Origins of Christian Worship; Neyrey, Give God the Glory; Richardson, “Worship in New Testament Times, Christian,” IDB 4:883–94; J.  F. White, A Brief History of Christian Worship (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1993); Everett Ferguson, ed., Worship in Early Christianity (New York: Garland, 1993); Lawrence J. Johnson, Worship in the Early Church: An Anthology of Historical Sources (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2009); Michael J. Wilkens and Terence Paige, eds., Worship, Theology and Ministry in the Early Church: Essays in Honor of Ralph P. Martin (Sheffield, UK: JSOT Press, 1992); and L. Duchesne, Christian Worship (5th ed.; London: SPCK, 1923). 15. Cullmann, Early Christian Worship. 16. Cullmann, Early Christian Worship, 7–36. 17. Cullmann, Early Christian Worship, 37–119. Cullmann states that his purpose in the second section of his book is “to submit proof that there can be traced in the Gospel of John a distinct line of thought connecting with the service of worship” (37). In order to provide a meaningful commentary on any biblical text and the subject of worship, it is imperative that a clear and meaningful working definition of worship first be provided. As we shall see Cullmann does not do this. 18. From this point onward I will refer to the Old Testament by the abbreviation OT. 19. Cullmann, Early Christian Worship, 7. 20. Martin, Worship in the Early Church, 33. 21. Cullmann, Early Christian Worship, 7. 22. Cullmann, Early Christian Worship, 10, 10n4 (italics in original). Cullmann also makes the assertion, “It is correct to say that from the time of Christ’s resurrection, the day of rest appointed by God [the Sabbath/Saturday] was transferred to the day of Christ’s resurrection [Sunday] and was regarded as ‘fulfilled’ in it.” Cullmann, Early Christian

NOTES

23. 24.

25.

26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31.

32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43.

| 287

Worship, 11. David E. Aune comments that Cullmann’s “perception is both oversimplified and incorrect.” Aune, “Worship, Early Christian,” ABD 6:979. The term “Lord’s day” is a NT hapax legomenon; it appears only in Rev 1:10. See also Did. 14.1; Ignatius Magn. 9.1; Gospel of Peter 9:35; 12:50. On the origins of Sunday in Christian worship as the “Lord’s day,” in addition to Carson, From Sabbath to Lord’s Day, see also Julián López Martín, “El Origen del Domingo: Estado de la Cuestión,” Salmanticensis 38.3 (1991): 269–97. On the question and issue of when the Pauline communities came together, see excursus A in sec. 1.1.2. of chap. 5. R. de Lacey rightly cautions, “Since none of St. Paul’s surviving writings provides explicit discussion on the use of Sabbath or Sunday, care is needed in any attempt to reconstruct his attitude toward the days.” D. R. de Lacey, “The Sabbath / Sunday Question and the Law in the Pauline Corpus,” in D. A. Carson, ed., From Sabbath to Lord’s Day: A Biblical, Historical, and Theological Investigation (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1982), 160. Richard Bauckham similarly cautions, “In this enquiry, where solid evidence is lacking and conjecture has been rife, we must proceed with care. Too many scholars in the past have been tempted to advance confident conclusions that the evidence does not justify.” R. J. Bauckham, “The Lord’s Day,” in Carson, From Sabbath to Lord’s Day, 233. Cullmann, Early Christian Worship, 29. Is it possible that Cullmann’s Lutheran tradition may have influenced his view of the Eucharist in the first century? On Cullmann’s Lutheran background, see The Christian Century (March 3, 1999): 244. Aune, “Worship, Early Christian,” ABD 6:979. Martin, “Aspects of Worship in the New Testament Church,” 15. Oscar Cullmann, Prayer in the New Testament (trans. John Bowden; Overtures to Biblical Theology; Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1995). Cullmann, Prayer in the New Testament, 1–13. Cullmann, Prayer in the New Testament, 15–118. Cullmann, Prayer in the New Testament, 119–44. Cullmann characterizes prayer as “one of God’s greatest gifts of love to human beings” (143). Cullmann provides a rich resource of endnotes in this book. Cullmann, Prayer in the New Testament, 69–88. Cullmann, Prayer in the New Testament, 70. C. F. D. Moule, Worship in the New Testament (Ecumenical Studies in Worship 9; London: Lutterworth Press, 1961). Moule, Worship in the New Testament, 7–8. Moule, Worship in the New Testament, 9–17. Moule, Worship in the New Testament, 10. Moule, Worship in the New Testament, 18–46. Moule, Worship in the New Testament, 47–60. Moule, Worship in the New Testament, 61. Moule, Worship in the New Testament, 61–66. Moule, Worship in the New Testament, 67–81. Moule, Worship in the New Testament, 82–85.

288

44. 45. 46. 47.

48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. 67. 68.

69. 70.

71. 72.

73. 74. 75. 76.

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

Moule, Worship in the New Testament, 9–17. Moule, Worship in the New Testament, 82. Moule, Worship in the New Testament, 7. I note in passing for the moment Paul’s personal and individual account where he speaks of his “thorn in the flesh” and how he beseeched the Lord three time to remove it (2 Cor 12:7–10). Here we have an example of a personal act where petition to the Lord is offered by an individual. I will treat 2 Cor 12:7–10 later in this study. Moule, Worship in the New Testament, 67–81. Moule, Worship in the New Testament, 79–81. D. Gerhard Delling, Worship in the New Testament (trans. Percy Scott; London: Darton, Longman and Todd, 1962). Delling, Worship in the New Testament, xi-14. Delling, Worship in the New Testament, 15–22. Delling, Worship in the New Testament, 23–41. Delling, Worship in the New Testament, 42–54. Delling, Worship in the New Testament, 55–76. Delling, Worship in the New Testament, 77–91. Delling, Worship in the New Testament, 92–103. Delling, Worship in the New Testament, 104–27. Delling, Worship in the New Testament, 128–50. Delling, Worship in the New Testament, 151–62. Delling, Worship in the New Testament, 163–71. Delling, Worship in the New Testament, 172–82. Delling, Worship in the New Testament, 183–85. Delling, Worship in the New Testament, xi. Delling, Worship in the New Testament, xiii (italics in original). Delling, Worship in the New Testament, xiii (italics in original). Moule, Worship in the New Testament, 10–15. Moule states, “Christian worship bears the same sort of relation to Jewish worship . . . In the same way, Christian worship . . . was continuous with, and yet in marked contrast to, Jewish worship.” Moule, Worship in the New Testament, 9. Delling, Worship in the New Testament, 174. Delling, Worship in the New Testament, 42. Delling further admits that the primitive Christian service was “fluid” even though he believes it had “fixed forms.” Delling, Worship in the New Testament, 55. Delling, Worship in the New Testament, 49–52. Delling, Worship in the New Testament, 165. In a footnote (165n5), Delling acknowledges Cullmann as the source for this argument in O. Cullmann, Revue d’Histoire et de Philosophie Religieuses 16 (1936): 8–10. See for instance Justin Martyr Apol. 1.65.2. Delling, Worship in the New Testament, 105–6. Delling, Worship in the New Testament, 105. Delling, Worship in the New Testament, 105–6.

NOTES

77. 78. 79. 80. 81. 82. 83.

84.

85. 86. 87. 88. 89. 90. 91. 92. 93. 94. 95. 96. 97. 98. 99. 100. 101. 102. 103. 104. 105. 106. 107.

108. 109. 110.

| 289

Delling, Worship in the New Testament, 106. Delling, Worship in the New Testament, 106. BDAG, 882. Delling, Worship in the New Testament, 106. Delling, Worship in the New Testament, 182 (italics in original). Ralph P. Martin, Worship in the Early Church (Westwood, NJ: Fleming H. Revell, 1964). Ralph P. Martin, “Worship,” in Dictionary of Paul and His Letters (ed. Gerald  F. Hawthorne, Ralph P. Martin, and Daniel G. Reid; Downers Grove, IL; Leicester, UK: Inter-Varsity Press, 1993), 982–91. Ralph P. Martin, A Hymn of Christ: Philippians 2:5–11 in Recent Interpretation and in the Setting of Early Christian Worship (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1997); Ralph P. Martin, “Some Reflections on New Testament Hymns,” in Christ the Lord: Studies in Christology Presented in Honour of Donald Guthrie (ed. Harold H. Rowdon; Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1982), 37–49; and Ralph P. Martin, “Aspects of Worship in the New Testament Church,” Vox Evangelica 2 (1963): 6–32. Martin, Worship in the Early Church, 9–17. Martin, Worship in the Early Church, 18–27. Martin, Worship in the Early Church, 28–38. Martin, Worship in the Early Church, 39–52. Martin, Worship in the Early Church, 53–65. Martin, Worship in the Early Church, 66–76. Martin, Worship in the Early Church, 77–86. Martin, Worship in the Early Church, 87–109. Martin, Worship in the Early Church, 110–29. Martin, Worship in the Early Church, 130–40. Martin, “Worship,” DPL, 982. Martin, “Worship,” DPL, 982–83. Martin, “Worship,” DPL, 983–86. Martin, “Worship,” DPL, 986–89. Martin, “Worship,” DPL, 989–90. Martin, Worship in the Early Church, 10. Martin, Worship in the Early Church, 10 (italics in original). Martin, Worship in the Early Church, 10. Martin, Worship in the Early Church, 10. Martin, Worship in the Early Church, 11. Martin, Worship in the Early Church, 12. Martin, Worship in the Early Church, 12. Edith M. Humphrey, Grand Entrance: Worship on Earth as in Heaven (Grand Rapids: Brazos, 2011). Humphrey focuses mainly on the corporate aspect of worship in the faith community. Martin, “Worship,” DPL, 982. Martin, “Worship,” DPL, 986–90. Martin, “Worship,” DPL, 986–87.

290

111. 112. 113. 114. 115. 116. 117. 118. 119. 120. 121. 122. 123. 124. 125.

126. 127. 128. 129. 130. 131. 132. 133. 134. 135. 136. 137. 138. 139. 140. 141. 142. 143. 144. 145. 146. 147.

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

Martin, “Worship,” DPL, 982. Hahn, Worship of the Early Church. Hahn, Worship of the Early Church, 1–5. Hahn, Worship of the Early Church, 6–31. Hahn, Worship of the Early Church, 32–78. Hahn, Worship of the Early Church, 79–103. Hahn, Worship of the Early Church, 104–8. Hahn, Worship of the Early Church, 1, 2. Hahn, Worship of the Early Church, 2. Hahn, Worship of the Early Church, 1. Hahn, Worship of the Early Church, 2. Hahn, Worship of the Early Church, 36. Hahn probably has Romans 9:4 in mind in the case of latrei,a. Xenophon, Cyrop. 3.1.36; Anab. 6.1.22; Plato, Apology 9.23b. BDAG, 587; Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 53.14. On the frequency of proskune,w in the NT, see H. Greeven, TDNT 6:763–65; Larry W. Hurtado, How on Earth Did Jesus Become a God? Historical Questions about Earliest Devotion to Jesus (Grand Rapids; Cambridge, UK: Eerdmans, 2005), 145–48. Hahn, Worship of the Early Church, 37. Hahn, Worship of the Early Church, 104. Hahn, Worship of the Early Church, 105. The five points are listed on pages 105–8. David  E. Aune, “Worship, Early Christian,” in Anchor Bible Dictionary (New York: Doubleday, 1992), 6:973–89. Aune, “Worship, Early Christian,” ABD 6:973. Cullmann, Early Christian Worship, 10. Aune, “Worship, Early Christian,” ABD 6:973. Aune, “Worship, Early Christian,” ABD 6:978 (italics mine). Aune, “Worship, Early Christian,” ABD 6:974. Aune, “Worship, Early Christian,” ABD 6:974. Aune, “Worship, Early Christian,” ABD 6:974. Aune, “Worship, Early Christian,” ABD 6:974–75. Otto, Idea of the Holy. The English version was published in 1923. Otto, Idea of the Holy, 8–11. Otto, Idea of the Holy, 12–24. Aune, “Worship, Early Christian,” ABD 6:975. Aune, “Worship, Early Christian,” ABD 6:974. Aune, “Worship, Early Christian,” ABD 6:974. Aune, “Worship, Early Christian,” ABD 6:974. Hahn, Worship of the Early Church, 1. While Aune places the formation of an order of worship at the end of the second century CE, Hahn places it in the middle of the second century. Aune, “Worship, Early Christian,” ABD 6:976. Aune, “Worship, Early Christian,” ABD 6:976. Aune goes on to discuss the various elements in the order of service, which he initially admitted there is no evidence for

NOTES

148. 149. 150. 151. 152.

153. 154.

155.

156.

157. 158. 159. 160.

161.

| 291

in the NT texts. In this respect, Aune is committing himself to the very anachronistic argumentation that he has openly warned about at the beginning of his article. See Aune, “Worship, Early Christian,” ABD 6:974. Aune, “Worship, Early Christian,” ABD 6:980–83. Aune, “Worship, Early Christian,” ABD 6:987. Aune, “Worship, Early Christian,” ABD 6:987. Aune, “Worship, Early Christian,” ABD 6:987. The Vulgate of Revelation 3:9 has “ecce faciam illos ut veniant et adorent ante pedes tuos” (italics mine). The source for this saying is based on the LXX passages of Isaiah 45:14; 49:23 where proskune,w is also used of the Gentile enemies of Israel who will come and bow before them. Also see Genesis 27:29 (LXX, MT) where Jacob is said to have the nations come and bow down before him. See George Eldon Ladd, A Commentary on the Revelation of John (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1972), 60–61. Aune, “Worship, Early Christian,” ABD 6:973. Neyrey, Give God the Glory, 144 (italics mine). This observation by Neyrey is a relatively recent one (his book was published in 2007), which indicates that the problem of defining worship continues to be a present concern and issue in scholarship. If scholars, according to Neyrey, tend to describe worship and not define it, the question arises, how can one describe something which has not first been defined? Richardson, “Worship in New Testament Times, Christian,” IDB 4:883–94. A legitimate question also arises here: how does one focus on the development of something which has not been defined? A parallel problem by way of comparison is the rendering of the various words a[|dhj, ge,enna, and tartaro,w, which were all translated in the KJV with the same one English word: “hell” (e.g., Luke 16:23; Matt 18:9; 2 Peter 2:4). Krister Stendahl, Paul among Jews and Gentiles (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1976), 78–96. Cullmann, Early Christian Worship, 10–11, 29. Delling, Worship in the New Testament, 49–52, 165. Jerome H. Neyrey, “Lost in Translation: Did It Matter If Christians ‘Thanked’ God or ‘Gave God Glory’?” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 71 (2009): 1 (all capital letters for emphasis in original). While Neyrey states that the meaning of words is found in “the cultural use of them” and “not in lexica,” one wonders how one should understand the cultural use of such words without the aid of lexica to define them. Larry  W. Hurtado, Lord Jesus Christ: Devotion to Jesus in Earliest Christianity (Grand Rapids; Cambridge, UK: Eerdmans, 2003); Larry  W. Hurtado, How on Earth Did Jesus Become a God? Historical Questions about Earliest Devotion to Jesus (Grand Rapids; Cambridge, UK: Eerdmans, 2005); Larry W. Hurtado, At the Origins of Christian Worship: The Context and Character of Earliest Christian Devotion (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000); Larry W. Hurtado, “The Binitarian Shape of Early Christian Worship,” in The Jewish Roots of Christological Monotheism: Papers from the St. Andrews Conference on the Historical Origins of the Worship of Jesus (ed. Carey C. Newman, James R. Davila, and Gladys S. Lewis; Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism 63; Leiden: Brill,

292

162.

163.

164. 165. 166. 167.

168. 169. 170. 171.

172. 173. 174. 175. 176. 177.

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

1999), 187–213; Larry W. Hurtado, One God, One Lord: Early Christian Devotion and Ancient Jewish Monotheism (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1988). Neyrey, Give God the Glory; Neyrey, “Lost in Translation,” 1–23; Neyrey, Paul, In Other Words. Jerome H. Neyrey, Give God the Glory: Ancient Prayer and Worship in Cultural Perspective (Grand Rapids; Cambridge, UK: Eerdmans, 2007); Jerome H. Neyrey, “Lost in Translation: Did It Matter If Christians ‘Thanked’ God or ‘Gave God Glory’?” Catholic Biblical Quarterly  71 (2009):  1; Jerome  H. Neyrey, Paul, In Other Words: A Cultural Reading of His Letters (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1990). Richard Bauckham, Jesus and the God of Israel: God Crucified and Other Studies on the New Testament’s Christology of Divine Identity (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans; Cambridge: Paternoster, 2008); Richard Bauckham, “The Throne of God and the Worship of Jesus,” in Newman, Davila, Davila, and Lewis, Jewish Roots of Christological Monotheism, 43–69; Richard Bauckham, God Crucified: Monotheism and Christology in the New Testament (Grand Rapids; Cambridge, UK: Eerdmans, 1998); Richard Bauckham, “The Worship of Jesus in Philippians 2:9–11,” in Ralph P Martin and Brian J. Dodd, eds., Where Christology Began: Essays on Philippians 2 (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1998), 128–39; Richard Bauckham, “The Worship of Jesus,” in Anchor Bible Dictionary (New York: Doubleday, 1992), 3:812–19; Richard Bauckham, “The Worship of Jesus in Apocalyptic Christianity,” NTS 27 (1981): 322–41. This has been treated extensively by Hurtado in his book Lord Jesus Christ. Hurtado, Lord Jesus Christ, 137. Hurtado, At the Origins of Christian Worship, 65. Hurtado, Lord Jesus Christ, 137, 138. Also see Hurtado, How on Earth Did Jesus Become a God? 25–30 where Hurtado explains the phenomena of the worship of Jesus and its features in early Christianity but does not define “worship” itself. Among the phenomena which imply “worship,” according to Hurtado, are actions such as prayer, invocation and confession of Jesus, baptism in Jesus’ name, the Lord’s Supper, hymns, and prophecy. See Hurtado, Lord Jesus Christ, 138–51; Hurtado, One God, One Lord, 100–14; Hurtado, At the Origins of Christian Worship, 70–94. Hurtado, Lord Jesus Christ, 137. In Hurtado’s other works One God, One Lord and How on Earth Did Jesus Become a God? there is no definition of worship provided. Hurtado, Lord Jesus Christ, 137–38. Hurtado, At the Origins of Christian Worship, 69. Hurtado uses the same argumentation in “Binitarian Shape of Early Christian Worship,” 187–88. Hurtado says further, “[W]hen this constellation of devotional actions is set in the general first-century religious context, it is properly understood as constituting the cultic worship of Jesus. . . . Jesus is reverenced in a constellation of actions that resemble the ways a god is reverenced in the Roman-era religious scene.” Hurtado, Lord Jesus Christ, 138, 151. I will deal more fully with the text of Col 2:18 below. Neyrey, Give God the Glory, 144. Henton Davies, “Worship in the Old Testament,” in IDB 4:879. Neyrey, Give God the Glory, 144. Neyrey, Give God the Glory, 148. Neyrey, Give God the Glory, 147–48.

NOTES

| 293

178. Neyrey, Give God the Glory, 147. 179. Neyrey, Give God the Glory, 147. Neyrey makes reference to Bruce Malina, “What Is Prayer?” TBT 18.4 (1980): 214–20. 180. Neyrey, Give God the Glory, 147. 181. Neyrey, Give God the Glory, 148–59. Neyrey also goes on to classify worship in terms of transformation rituals and ceremonies (159–65). 182. Neyrey, Give God the Glory, 165 (italics mine). 183. Bauckham, God Crucified, 10–11. 184. Bauckham, Jesus and the God of Israel, 1. 185. Bauckham, “The Worship of Jesus in Apocalyptic Christianity,” 322–23. Also see Bauckham, “Jesus, Worship of,” ABD 3:816. 186. Bauckham, “Jesus, Worship of” ABD 3:813–15. 187. Bauckham, “Throne of God and the Worship of Jesus,” 44.

Chapter Three: A Proposed Definition and Criteria for Worship 1. By a spiritual subject I would include angels. Angels are said to worship God (Pss 103:20; 148:2; Luke 2:13–14; Rev 7:11–12; cf. Rev 22:9), to worship God’s Son (Heb 1:6), and to worship both God and the exalted Jesus (Rev 5:9–11). Angels are also described as God’s servants (Heb 1:7), which implies their inferiority to him and that as servants they attribute honor and respect to God. Note in Rev 5:13, every creature or created thing (pa/n kti,sma) in heaven, earth, and under the earth and the sea respond with rendering blessing, honor, glory, and might forever and ever to both God and the exalted Jesus (the Lamb). The distinction in the relationship between God and the Lamb and those who render worship is that they are creatures and as such are servants of God and the Lamb. They express their service as servants by acclaiming the various virtues of blessing, honor, glory, and might to God and the Lamb. 2. In this study I will use the word divine synonymously with a heavenly being, superhuman being, and superspiritual entity, either in the singular or plural. 3. This definition of worship can also be used in reference to polytheistic worship that is a personal, relational religious act between a human subject(s) and the gods. It can also be used in reference to idolatry when an idol or idols become an object or objects of worship. In reference to Paul’s view of the divine object, I argue that Paul subscribed to the view of monotheism, the belief that there was only one true God (Rom 3:30; 16:25; 1 Cor 8:4–6; Gal 3:20; cf. Eph 4:6; 1 Tim 1:17; 2:5; 6:15–16). Also see Philo, Decal. 65; cf. Opif. 171; Spec. 1.52; cf. Spec.1.30; Josephus, Ant. 3.91. On the problem of monotheism and biblical theology, see Bauckham, Jesus and the God of Israel, 60–126; Mark S. Smith, The Origins of Biblical Monotheism: Israel’s Polytheistic Background and the Ugaritic Texts (Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, 2001); John F. A. Sawyer, “Biblical Alternatives to Monotheism,” Theology 87 (1984): 172–80; Loren T. Stuckenbruck and Wendy E. S. North, eds., Early Jewish and Christian Monotheism (JSNTSup 263; London: T&T Clark [Continuum], 2004).

294

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

4. This definition equally applies in a plural or communal context where the human subjects would function as the worshippers and God as the worshipped object. 5. An example of the outward aspect of worship being communicated internally is expressed in the Prayer of Manasseh 11: “And now I bend the knee of my heart, beseeching thee for thy kindness” (RSV). The NET on the Prayer of Manasseh notes concerning this verse: “The expression is a picturesque depiction of genuine humility and inner submission to God” (n. 32). 6. These three criteria, however, can also be used in a nonreligious context of a relationship where there is an inferior subject and a superior object such as a servant and master, a child and parent, or a citizen and a governor. These relationships do not denote a religious worship relationship because both the subject and object are human. Throughout this research work, when I use these three criteria, I use them with an interest in a worship context. 7. Martin, Worship in the Early Church, 10. Neyrey defines it as follows: “object of worship = a worthy figure.” Neyrey, Give God the Glory, 144. 8. An example of religious worship that involves entities other than God can be seen in Rev 13 where the world is said to worship (proskune,w) two objects: the dragon (Satan; cf. Rev 12:9; 20:2), and the beast (Rev 13:4, 8, 12). The subjects in this case are “the world,” the objects of worship are the dragon and the beast, and the level of action or medium in which worship is expressed are the praises and acclamations of the subjects that no one is like the beast and no one can fight against it, thus honoring the beast with praises of uniqueness. The dragon is worshipped in this case as the source of the beast’s power or authority. Revelation 14:9, 11 mentions the worship of the beast and the worship of his image (cf. Rev 13:14–15). This indicates that worship can also include the representation of the object of worship. Revelation 9:20 speaks of demons (daimo,nia) being worshipped as well as idols (ei;dwla) being worshipped. This indicates that worship need not necessarily include God as its object, but the context in each of these cases indicates that we are dealing with a religious context, and it is in this particular context that worship exists. While the writer of Revelation discourages such worship, he does not deny that it is worship. The nature of the religious context of these passages demonstrates that worship can take place, and the texts admits as much because the objects in the texts above are viewed as superhuman entities (dragon / Satan, the beast, image of the beast, demons, idols). We also observe here the relationship of the inferior or minor (the worshippers) to the superior or major (the worshipped object). Another example can be found in Q (Matt 4:9; Luke 4:7) where Satan tempts Jesus to worship him, and in return for such worship Satan promises Jesus all the kingdoms of the world. We see the same criteria for worship here in the temptation narrative. Jesus is asked to be the subject who renders worship to the object (Satan) by exercising the level of action of proskune,w to prostrate oneself before another, thereby showing his inferiority to the greater one who occupies a superior position. This is a religious context since Satan claims superiority and rulership over the kingdoms of the world. The religious context is further reinforced by Jesus’ rebuke (Matt 4:10; Luke 4:8) that only God is the legitimate object of worship and that only he should be worshipped (proskune,w) and

NOTES

| 295

served (latreu,w). The question in the temptation narrative like Revelation is not whether Satan can be worshipped; the question has to do with the legitimate object that deserves worship. 9. Neyrey, Give God the Glory, 37 (italics in original). 10. This notion is captured in the Eucharistic liturgy found in The Book of Common Prayer (New York: Church Hymnal Corporation, 1979), 333 (italics mine) in the following words: “Lift up your hearts.” “We lift them up unto the Lord.” “Let us give thanks unto our Lord God.” “It is meet and right so to do.” 11. Neyrey, “Lost in Translation,” 3. Neyrey also adds “to extol” and “to acknowledge” to the list as synonyms. 12. The notion of honor being given to that which is commensurate with its identity is seen in Mal 1:6:“‘A son honors his father, and servants their master. If then I am a father, where is the honor due me? And if I am a master, where is the respect due me?’ says the Lord of hosts to you, O priests, who despise my name. You say, “How have we despised your name?’” (NRSV). In this passage there are degrees of honor presented: 1. honor of a son to his father 2. honor of servants to their master 3. honor of priests to God as their father and master The degrees of honor are structured here on an ascending scale from 1 to 3. There is an honor that a son should render to his father and an honor servants should render to their master. YHWH asks the priests, where is his honor? If YHWH is a father and master to Israel, then like the earthly models, he should be given the honor and respect that is due to him. In neglecting to render this honor to YHWH, the priests despise his name and in effect show dishonor and disrespect to YHWH. In Mal 2:2, the refusal to honor YHWH’s name will result in curses against the priests. 13. Herodotus, Hist. 1.134.1–2. English translation taken from A. D. Godley, ed., Herodotus with an English Translation (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1920). Also at http:// www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0126%3Abook%3 D1%3Achapter%3D134 (accessed 19 July 2010). Greek text cited at http://www.perseus. tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Hdt.+1.134&fromdoc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0125 (accessed 19 July 2010). 14. See C. H. Dodd, The Epistle of Paul to the Romans (Moffatt New Testament Commentary; New York; London: Harper and Brothers Publishers, 1932), 165–66; William Sanday and Arthur C. Headlam, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans (5th ed.; ICC; New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1899), 288–90; Douglas J. Moo, The Epistle to the Romans (NICNT; Grand Rapids; Cambridge, UK: Eerdmans, 1996), 656–57. 15. See Marvin R. Vincent, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistles to the Philippians and Philemon (ICC; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1902), 133–34; David M.

296

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

Stanley, Boasting in the Lord: The Phenomenon of Prayer in Saint Paul (New York: Paulist Press, 1973), 106; Fee, Paul’s Letter to the Philippians, 407; Peter T. O’Brien, The Epistle to the Philippians: A Commentary on the Greek Text (NIGTC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans; Carlisle, UK: Paternoster, 1991), 489; Moisés Silva, Philippians (2nd ed.; Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2005), 194–95, 198. See F. F. Bruce, The Epistle to the Colossians, to Philemon, and to the Ephesians (NICNT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1984), 295; Ernest Best, Ephesians (ICC; London; New York: T&T Clark, 1998), 244–50, 269–73; William Barclay, The Letters to the Galatians and Ephesians (rev. ed.; Burlington, Ontario: G. R. Welch, 1976), 110–17. On Paul and the governmental authorities, see Paul David Feinberg, “The Christian and Civil Authorities,” Master’s Seminary Journal 10.1 (1999): 87–99; Jean-Noël Aletti, “La soumission des Chrétiens aux Autorités en Rm  13,1–7: Validité des arguments Pauliniens?” Biblica 89.4 (2008): 457–76. A similar idea is found in the synoptic gospel tradition (Mark 12:13–17; cf. Matt 22:15– 22; Luke 20:20–26) where Jesus is asked about paying tribute to Caesar. Jesus responds in Mark 12:17 by asserting, Ta. Kai,saroj avpo,dote Kai,sari kai. ta. tou/ qeou/ tw/| qew/ / “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s” (RSV). Both Paul and Mark use the same imperative aorist avpo,dote from avpodi,dwmi. What is to be noted in Mark 12:17 is that both Caesar and God are objects to whom certain things are to be rendered. The things that are Caesar’s or are his due are rightfully his and thus should be given to him by his subjects. Similarly, the things that are God’s or are his due should also be rightfully given to him by his subjects. The dues to be given in this case are commensurate with their respective objects, Caesar and God. A similar idea is also attested in the Fourth Gospel (John 19:10–11). Pilate tells Jesus that he has the authority or power (evxousi,a) to release him or crucify him, to which Jesus responds, Ouvk ei=cej evxousi,an kat evmou/ ouvdemi,an eiv mh. h=n dedome,non soi a;nwqen / “You would have no authority over Me, unless it had been given you from above” (NASB). Paul sees all authority as coming from God. Likewise in the Fourth Gospel, Jesus asserts that Pilate would have no authority to release him or crucify him unless it were given to him from “above,” i.e., from God. John N. Collins, Diakonia: Reinterpreting the Ancient Sources (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990), 77–95, 169–76. Collins further notes here that dia,kono,j need not be interpreted as a humble slave. On the semantic and social context of obligations to governmental authorities, see Thomas M. Coleman, “Binding Obligations in Romans 13:7: A Semantic Field and Social Context,” Tyndale Bulletin 48.2 (1997): 307–27; Aletti, “La soumission des Chrétiens aux Autorités en Rm 13,1–7,” 457–76. One of the honorific titles given to God and Jesus (Rev 17:14; 19:16) is “King of kings” and “Lord of lords” (together deemed as one title). This title serves to show that God and Jesus are the ultimate and true King and Lord of which all other kings and lords are vice-regents. On the metaphor of the body in 1 Cor 12, see Timothy L. Carter, “The Metaphor of Christ’s Body in 1 Corinthians 12,” in Porter, Paul: Jew, Greek, and Roman, 93–115.

NOTES

| 297

24. Seneca wrote, “quod vides, quo divina atque humana conclusa sunt, unum est; membra sumus corporis magni” / “All that you behold, that which comprises both god and man, are one—we are parts of one great body” (Ep. 95.52). Also see Livy, Hist. 2.32; Epictetus, Diatr. 2.10.4–5. 25. Dale B. Martin, The Corinthian Body (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1995), 95, 269. 26. I find what appears to be an interesting parallel to this thought in Acts 9:4–5: kai. pesw.n evpi. th.n gh/n h;kousen fwnh.n le,gousan auvtw/| Saou.l Saou,l ti, me diw,keij 5 ei=pen de, Ti,j ei= ku,rie o` de, VEgw, eivmi VIhsou/j o]n su. diw,keij / “He fell to the ground and heard a voice saying to him, ‘Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?’ He asked, ‘Who are you, Lord?’ The reply came, ‘I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting’” (NRSV). This text indicates that in persecuting the members of the Christian movement, Saul of Tarsus (Paul) was also persecuting Jesus. The persecution of the many (Christian believers) was the persecution of the one (Jesus). 27. Aristotle wrote, kai. kata. pa,nta tauvta. gi,netai kai. o[moia e`kate,rw| par’ e`kate,rou, o[per dei/ toi/j fi,loij u`pa,rcein / “and in all respects either party receives from the other the same or similar benefits, as it is proper that friends should do” (Aristotle, Eth. nic. 8.4.1; 8.13.8–9). The Greek text used and quoted comes from Ingram Bywater, ed., Aristoteles Ethica Nicomachea (1890?; repr., Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1894?). Also at http://www .perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0053%3Abekker%20 page%3D1155a%3Abekker%20line%3D5 (accessed 26 June 2010). The English translation used as a basis is H. Rackham, ed. and trans., Aristotle: The Nicomachean Ethics (1926; repr., Cambridge: Harvard University Press; London: William Heinemann, 1934). References to the text of Aristotle come from this source and hereafter will not each time be acknowledged anew. 28. Aristotle, Eth. nic. 8.v.5. Cicero also claimed: “For nothing gives more pleasure than the return of goodwill and the interchange of zealous service.” Cicero, Laelius d.A 14.49. English translation taken from Cicero, Cicero: De Senectute De Amicitia De Divinatione, With an English Translation (ed. William Armistead Falconer; Loeb Classical Library; London: W. Heinemann; Cambridge: Harvard University Press: 1923). 29. Aristotle, Eth. nic. 8.vii.2. 30. Aristotle, Eth. nic. 8. ix.1–2. 31. Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 34.5 define koinwni,a as “an association involving close mutual relations and involvement.” I have compiled the following list: Paul uses koinwni,a thirteen times in his letters (Rom 15:26; 1 Cor 1:9; 10:16 [2x]; 2 Cor 6:14; 8:4; 9:13; 13:13; Gal 2:9; Phil 1:5; 2:1; 3:10; Phlm 6), more than any other NT writer. The word koinwni,a appears once by Luke in Acts 2:42, once in Heb 13:16, and four times in 1 John 1:3 (2x), 6–7. 32. G. Stählin, TDNT 9:152. Numerous references to ancient sources in support of this are cited by Stählin. 33. Paul actually calls on Christian believers to th/| timh/| avllh,louj prohgou,menoi / “outdo one another in showing honor” (Rom 12:10 NRSV). 34. Delling notes regarding u`pota,ssw, “Originally it is a hierarchical term which stresses the relation to superiors.” G. Delling, TDNT 8:41.

298

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

35. This is seen in Rev 20:4 where the martyrs are rewarded because they were faithful and would not worship the beast or its image or receive its mark. In the Synoptic Gospels, Jesus promises that those who lose their life for his sake will regain them (Matt 10:39; 16:25; Mark 8:35; Luke 9:24). Jesus makes these statements in the context of total submission to him by calling on people to take up their cross and deny themselves in order to follow him. The reference to the cross carries connotations of suffering and death. In Matt 10:37, Jesus calls for one’s love for him to supersede the love a person has for his or her own family. In Heb 12:9, a comparison is made between respect shown to earthly fathers who disciplined their children and submission to God the Father of spirits. The argument is that of the lesser to the greater. If one obeyed and respected one’s earthly father by submitting to him, how much more should one submit to God who is the Father of all. See comments in Donald Guthrie, The Letter to the Hebrews (Tyndale New Testament Commentaries; Leicester, UK; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1983), 254. In Heb 13:17, the writer commands the readers to submit (u`pei,kw) to the leaders of the faith community. 36. On the subject of women veiling their heads in 1 Cor 11:2–16, see David W. J. Gill, “The Importance of Roman Portraiture for Head-Coverings in 1 Corinthians 11:2–16,” Tyndale Bulletin 41.2 (1990): 245–60; William J. Martin, “1 Corinthians 11:2–16: An Interpretation” in Apostolic History and the Gospel: Biblical and Historical Essays Presented to F. F. Bruce on His 60th Birthday (ed. Woodrow Ward Gasque and Ralph P. Martin; Exeter: Paternoster, 1970), 231–41; Francis Watson, “The Authority of the Voice: A Theological Reading of 1  Cor 11.2–16,” NTS 46 (2000): 520–36; Todd Penner and Caroline Vander Stichele, “Unveiling Paul: Gendering Ethos in 1 Corinthians 11:2–16,” Lectio Difficilior 2 (2004), http://www.lectio.unibe.ch/04_2/HTML/penner_stichele. htm; Gordon  D. Fee, The First Epistle to the Corinthians (NICNT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987), 518–22; A.  C. Thiselton, The First Epistle to the Corinthians: A Commentary on the Greek Text (NIGTC; Grand Rapids; Cambridge, UK: Eerdmans, 2000), 838–39; John D. K. Ekem, “Does 1 Cor 11:2–16 Legislate for ‘Head Covering’?” Neotestamentica 35.1–2 (2001): 169–76. 37. This phrase is considered by many commentators to be a difficult one. Fee, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 518; Leon Morris, The First Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians: An Introduction and Commentary (Grand Rapids; Cambridge, UK: Eerdmans, 1985), 152. 38. Joseph A. Fitzmyer, “A Feature of Qumran Angelology and the Angels of I Cor. xi. 10,” NTS 4 (1957), 48–58. 39. The same idea is evident in Qumran in “The Rule of the Congregation” (1QSa) where the statement is made, “For the holy angels are a part of their congregation.” Also the “Damascus Document” bars people with physical and mental disabilities from entering the worshipping community or congregation because “the holy angels are in your midst.” English translation citations of the Dead Sea Scrolls are taken from Michael O. Wise, Martin G. Abegg, and Edward M. Cook, eds., The Dead Sea Scrolls: A New Translation (San Francisco: Harper, 1996), 146–7. R. M. M. Tuschling also notes that “[t]he fellowship of the community with angels is a pervasive theme.” R. M. M. Tuschling, Angels and Orthodoxy: A Study in their Development in Syria and Palestine from the Qumran Texts to

NOTES

40.

41. 42.

43. 44. 45.

46.

47. 48.

| 299

Ephrem the Syrian (Studien und Texte zu Antike und Christentum 40; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2007), 117. A similar idea appears in Heb 12:22–23 where the writer speaks of Christian worshippers coming to the heavenly Jerusalem and the assembly (evkklhsi,a|) where there are a muria,sin avgge,lwn panhgu,rei / “innumerable angels in festal gathering.” Heb 13:2 warns against failing to show hospitality to strangers, for some have entertained angels in disguise. The writer of Hebrews sees the angels as ministering spirits and servants to Christian believers (Heb 1:14). Morris, First Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians, 153. The idea that these “angels” are evil angels or spirits based on Gen 6:1–2 (and later suggested by Tertullian, Virg. Vel. 7.4–8) who are tempted by women into lust is highly unlikely. Archibald Robertson and Alfred Plummer, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the First Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians (Edinburgh: T&T Clark; New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1961), 233. Paul calls on women to veil themselves during worship in 1 Cor 11:2–16 and not generally at all times outside the worship gathering. Evil angels need not wait for the worship gathering to be enticed. Also, Fee rules this out on the grounds that it is foreign to Paul, and especially in the context of worship in 1 Cor 11:2–16. Fee, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 521. However, on the opinion that the reference to the angels in 1 Cor 11:10 refers to a potential threatening invasion on women in the worshipping community, see Loren T. Stuckenbruck, Angel Veneration and Christology, 231–32. Fitzmyer, “Feature of Qumran Angelology and the Angels of I Cor. xi. 10,” 48–58. Francois Tolmie, “Angels as Arguments? The Rhetorical Function of References to Angels in the Main Letters of Paul” (paper read at the International Colloquium for New Testament held at the University of Pretoria, South Africa, 23–26 August 2009), 12. Paper also presented at the Society for Biblical Literature’s International Meeting, 25–29 July 2010, in Tartu, Estonia. Tolmie, “Angels as Arguments?” 12. For a similar argument, see Thiselton, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 841. Humphrey, Grand Entrance. This idea is also reflected in Xenophon Mem. 4.3.15., ์໵່͘ဎ‫่˗ڗ‬ර۟࿰ࢆမ, ཰ࠗԆࢆ‫ڗ‬Ԇ˗‫ڗ‬໵່͘ ࠗඨߥࠗမဎ۟͘မဎ͘࿽͘‫ۭࣹ͘ݰ‬໅Ǔߥ‫ڗ‬࿽˗ႎ ඾ဎ͘໏ߥ›‫ࠗ͘ڗ‬රဎ۟‫ݰ‬န›ङဎර৓໅ǓԆߥशඥ‫ݰ‬ԆۭԆဎරࢆ͘໅ɘۭ۟͘ǓԆ / “But my heart fails me when I think that no man can ever render due thanks to the gods for their benefits.” Philo of Alexandria notes this in Spec. 1.277, to.n auvtarke,staton e`autw/| kai. mhdeno.j tw/n evn gene,sei crei/on( o[stij w"n to. prw/ton avgaqo,n( to. teleio,taton / “[God] who is most allsufficient for himself and who has no need of any thing created; who, being himself the first and most perfect good thing.” John Piper, “Acknowledgments,” in The Pleasures of God (rev. ed.; Portland, 1991; repr., Colorado Springs: Multnomah Books, 2000), 10 (italics mine). Philo, Leg. 3.10 also recognizes this point: pw/j ouvk avdu,naton to.n qeo.n avmei,yasqai h" evpaine,sai kata. th.n avxi,an to.n ta. o[la susthsa,menon evk mh. o;ntwnÈ / “how can it be anything but absolutely impossible adequately to requite God, or worthily to praise him who created the whole universe out of things that had no previous existence.” See also 2 Macc 14:35, su. ku,rie tw/n o[lwn avprosdeh.j u`pa,rcwn / “O Lord of all, who hast need of nothing” (RSV).

300

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

49. BDB, 458. 50. W. L. Holladay, ed., A Concise Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament: Based upon the Lexical Work of Ludwig Koehler and Walter Baumgartner (Leiden: Brill, 1997), 150. 51. R. Laird Harris, Gleason L. Archer Jr., Bruce K. Waltke, eds., The Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament (Chicago: Moody Press, 1980), 943. 52. Johan Lust, Erik Eynikel, and Katrin Hauspie, A Greek-English Lexicon of the Septuagint (rev. ed.; Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2003), no. 2435. For the use of do,xa in the NT, see Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 14.49; 33.357; 87.4, 23; 79.18. 53. Depending on the context the words dAbK and do,xa can also apply to beings other than God who possess great wealth such as Jacob (Gen 31:1), Joseph (Gen 45:13), or the splendor of the priestly garments (Exod 28:2, 40). 54. An example of this can be seen in Luke 14:10 where Jesus addresses the subject of humility and hospitality at a wedding feast. He stresses that when one is invited to a wedding feast, he should sit (or “recline”; NASB) at the lowest place so that when the host insists that he move up to a higher place he will have do,xa evnw,pion pa,ntwn tw/n sunanakeime,nwn soi / “glory in the presence of all that sit at meat with thee” (ASV; cf. NKJV). The ASV and NKJV translates do,xa literally here as “glory” as does the Vulgate which renders it “gloria.” The intended meaning is that of receiving honor before all (in contrast to being shamed; see Luke 14:9), and the word do,xa communicates this idea. The NIV, ESV, NET, NLT, NRSV, and RSV translate do,xa here as “honored” and the NASB as “honor.” The KJV translates the phrase as “then shalt thou have worship in the presence of them that sit at meat with thee.” The KJV in this case renders do,xa as “worship.” It is clear from the context of Luke 14:10 that honor is intended and that the translators of the KJV also understood the English worship to convey the idea of honor without religious implications. Since the context here is not religious but is rather a social one (a wedding feast), the idea is that of social honor. It should also be noted that honor or “glory” in this case is used of a human being and that the closer the proximity of the guest to the host, the more honor is conveyed in degree. On Luke 14:10, see Darrell L. Bock, Luke (IVP New Testament Commentary Series, ed. Grant R. Osbourne; Downers Grove, IL; Leicester, UK: Inter-Varsity Press, 1994), 249–51; Michael Patella, The Gospel According to Luke (New Collegeville Bible Commentary; Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2005), 97–98. 55. Aletti, “La soumission des Chrétiens aux Autorités en Rm 13,1–7,” 457–76. 56. In the biblical texts, when a human ruler presumes to take on the worth or properties of the divine, there is generally a responsive critique and scathing condemnation, especially as attested in the prophetic writings of the OT, which denounce such human rulers who presume to be divine, God, or a god. For example, in Isa 14:1–23 the king of Babylon is denounced for desiring to be “like the Most High” (Isa 14:14), and in Ezek 28:1–19 the king of Tyre is denounced for claiming “I am a god” (Ezek 28:2). The response given at the end of Ezek 28:2 (LXX) affirms the sharp distinction between the divine and the human: su. de. ei= a;nqrwpoj kai. ouv qeo.j / “yet you are but a man, and no god” (RSV). Note the NJB: “you are human, not divine.” Unless otherwise indicated, all quotations

NOTES

57.

58.

59.

60.

61. 62.

| 301

of the LXX in English are taken from Sir Lancelot C. L. Brenton, The Septuagint with Apocrypha: Greek and English (London: Samuel Bagster and Sons, 1851; repr., Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1992). Arrian, Anab. 4.11.2. (italics mine); see William Horbury, Jewish Messianism and the Cult of Christ (London: SCM Press, 1998) , 71. It is interesting that Alexander the Great even attempted to have himself venerated as a god following his own death by trying to effect his own bodily disappearance, which was a sign that a human had been favored by the gods and taken up to reside with the gods. See Arrian, Anab. 7.27.3. Arrian, Anab. 4.11.2. (italics mine). For full context, see Arrian, Anab. 4.9–12. That Alexander understood the idea of prostration as an act that was usually attributed to divine worship or service to the gods seems to be supported by Josephus in his account of the encounter of Alexander with the Jewish high priest who bore the mitre on his head with the name of God inscribed on it. Upon seeing this, Josephus writes that Alexander, proselqw.n mo,noj proseku,nhsen to. o;noma kai. to.n avrciere,a prw/toj hvspa,sato / “he approached by himself, and adored that name, and first greeted the high priest” (Ant. 11.331). This distinction is also evident in the case of the Ptolemies, particularly Ptolemy I who was honored as a god and was given the divine title “Soter” (“savior”) and was conferred with “isotheoi timai, honors equal to those given to gods.” Adela Yarbro Collins and John J. Collins, King and Messiah as Son of God: Divine, Human, and Angelic Messianic Figures in Biblical and Related Literature (Grand Rapids; Cambridge, UK: Eerdmans, 2008), 50. Similarly, Antiochus Epiphanes IV had cultic names minted on coins. In the early part of his reign, the name by which Antiochus was identified was the traditional formula Basile,wj Antio,cou / “King Antiochus.” Following his victory in Egypt in 169 BCE, the words Theos Epiphanes (“appearance of god”) were added. Collins and Collins, King and Messiah as Son of God, 51–52. Antiochus did not simply wish to be honored as a mere human king; he wanted to be honored as a god, thus indicating a distinction between the two. What we see in the case of Ptolemy I and Antiochus Epiphanes IV was an attempt to blur the lines of demarcation between the divine and the human, and in so doing they sought to penetrate the distinctive boundary between the human and the divine and assume the status of the divine category. On OT examples of human kings making selfasserting claims to being divine, see chap. 3, n. 288. A similar idea emphasizing the distance between God and the human is found in Eccl 5:2, ~yJi([;m. ^yr ‘~yI“m;V'B; ~yhiÛl{a/h' yKiä / “for God is in heaven, and you are on earth; therefore let your words be few.” LXX Eccl 5:2 similarly reads: o[ti o` qeo.j evn tw/| ouvranw/| kai. su. evpi. th/j gh/j evpi. tou,tw| e;stwsan oi` lo,goi sou ovli,goi / “for God is in heaven above, and thou upon earth: therefore let thy words be few.” In this text, the ontological distinction between God and the human is made. In addition, there is a marked distinction made in spatial terms as well. God is in heaven, the human is upon the earth, and because of this distinctive distance the human’s words should be few—a call and a reminder for reverence and humility in the presence of a superior. Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 23.126. Neyrey, Give God the Glory, 136.

302

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

63. Neyrey, Give God the Glory, 136. 64. H. Bietenhard, TDNT 5:253–54. The manipulation and control of the name of a deity is also seen in the use of incantations as attested in the magical papyrus. See C. K. Barrett, The New Testament Background (New York: Harper and Row, 1961), 31–35. 65. Neyrey, Give God the Glory, 87. Neyrey also provides here other similar doxologies that end with the “amen” among which are Rom 16:25–27; Eph 3:20–21; 1 Tim 1:17 and Jude 24–25. 66. Stanley, Boasting in the Lord, 74. 67. Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 72.6. 68. Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 78.22. 69. Sanday and Headlam, Epistle to the Romans, 339. 70. Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 78.15. 71. Neyrey, Give God the Glory, 129–30. 72. Neyrey, Give God the Glory, 130. 73. Neyrey, Give God the Glory, 130. 74. These first two questions are taken from Isa 40:13. See Moo, Epistle to the Romans (NICNT; Grand Rapids; Cambridge, UK: Eerdmans, 1996), 742. The language used by Paul varies slightly with that of the LXX. See Sanday and Headlam, Epistle to the Romans, 340. Paul also quotes Isa 40:13 in 1 Cor 2:16. In 1 Cor 2:16 after Paul quotes from Isa 40:13, “who has known the mind of the Lord?” Paul then asserts h`mei/j de. nou/n Cristou/ e;comen / “But we have the mind of Christ.” Here Paul seems to understand “the Lord” in Isa 40:13 as the Lord Jesus Christ and thus “mind of the Lord” = “mind of Christ.” See Dunn, Theology of Paul, 250; Fee, Pauline Christology, 130–31. Dunn opines here that Paul may be also “implying that ‘the mind of Christ’ is the next best thing” (ibid. 250). This, however, is unlikely on two grounds: (1) Paul habitually attributes ku,rioj passages (YHWH; MT) from the LXX to Jesus as their referent, and (2) Paul’s equation of “mind of the Lord” = “mind of Christ” follows naturally in the exegesis of the reading and the concept follows logically from the ground of point 1. On the attribution of ku,rioj (YHWH) texts in the LXX to Jesus by Paul, Wright notes, “Paul elsewhere takes particular texts which refer to YHWH and uses them, without apology or even much explanation, as texts about Jesus . . . He is not simply grabbing a few words at random without being aware of their full meaning.” Wright, Resurrection of the Son of God, 571. Also see in this regard the important work of David B. Capes, Old Testament Yahweh Texts in Paul’s Christology (WUNT 2/47; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1992). 75. The third question in the doxology comes from Job 41:11 (Job 41:3, MT; LXX). Moo, Epistle to the Romans, 742, 742n19 cites the reference as Job 41:3 but does not indicate that in the English translations the citation is given as Job 41:11. 76. Moo, Epistle to the Romans, 743. 77. Moo, Epistle to the Romans, 743. This thought is reflected in Acts 17:25: ouvde. u`po. ceirw/n avnqrwpi,nwn qerapeu,etai prosdeo,meno,j tinoj auvto.j didou.j pa,sin zwh.n kai. pnoh.n kai. ta. pa,nta / “nor is he served by human hands, as though he needed anything, since he himself gives to all mortals life and breath and all things.” Also, 1 Chr 29:14 says, %l' WNt;n" ^d>Y"miW

NOTES

| 303

lKoh; ^M.mi-yKi / “For all things come from Thee, and from Thy hand we have given Thee” (NASB 1971). Also note Philo’s similar comments in Spec. 1.271, ei;poimVle,gw a;n\ w= gennai/e( o` qeo.j ouv cai,rei( ka"nkai, e`kato,mbaj avna,gh| tij\ kth,mata ga.r auvtou/ ta. pa,nta( kekthme,noj o[mwj ouvdeno.j dei/tai\ cai,rei de. filoqe,oij gnw,maij kai. avndra,sin avskhtai/j o`sio,thtoj( parV w-n yaista. kai. kriqa.j kai. ta. euvtele,stata w`j timiw,tata pro. tw/n polutelesta,twn a;smenoj de,cetai I should say to such a man: My good man, God is not pleased even though a man bring hecatombs to his altar; for he possesses all things as his own, and stands in need of nothing. But he delights in minds which love God, and in men who practice holiness, from whom he gladly receives cakes and barley, and the very cheapest things, as if they were the most valuable in preference to such as are most costly (italics mine). 78. Paul shows this by means of the prepositions he employs, evx auvtou/ . . . di auvtou/ . . . eivj auvto.n / “from him . . . through him . . . to him.” Bauckham notes that, “The point of such formulae is that they describe God as the cause of all things, indicating the various types of causation . . . efficient causation (ek), instrumental causation (dia or en) and final causation (eis).” Bauckham, Jesus and the God of Israel, 102. As the cause of all things God is to be summarily acknowledged and praised, which is the purpose of the doxology. God is the descriptive object of the doxology. 79. The idea of God as the source, agent (or sustainer), and goal of all things was a common one among the Greek Stoic philosophers. This language was picked up by Hellenistic Jews and applied to YHWH. For an example of Hellenistic Judaism adopting such language to refer to God, see Philo, Cher. 125–26. The Roman writers Seneca, Epistle 65.8 and Marcus Aurelius, Mediations 4.23 also made similar comments. Moo thus argues that the possible source for Paul’s citation came out of the synagogue. See Moo, Epistle to the Romans, 743. 80. Josephus, War 5.218 asserts, tou/ qeou/ pa,nta kai. tw/| qew/|  / “all things are from God and for God.” In the Greek text of this passage, Josephus does not employ the prepositions as Paul does in Rom 11:36. 81. On the notion of the Deus absconditus, see Isa 45:15, [;yviAm laerf" y. I yhela{ / rTeTs; m. i lae hT'a; !kea ' / “Truly, you are a God who hides himself, O God of Israel, the Savior” (NRSV). C. K. Barrett notes that the concept of the invisibility of God was also commonplace in Greek philosophical thought yet also paralleled in the OT, although the motive was different. The unapproachability of God in the biblical texts is related to the sinfulness of humanity, which is antithetical to the holiness of God. See C. K. Barrett, The Pastoral Epistles (New Clarendon Bible; Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1963), 88. In Isa 6:1–8, the prophet Isaiah recognizes his sinful state in the presence of the holiness of God but also believes he is doomed because he has seen YHWH (Isa 6:5). Here the seeing of YHWH by Isaiah is set in contrast to his sinful nature, in short, for a sinful person to see YHWH who is holy leads to fatal consequences. 82. Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 58.50.

304

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

83. Leon Morris, The Epistle to the Romans (Grand Rapids; Cambridge, UK: Eerdmans, 1988), 429. 84. 2 Thess 2:4, o` avntikei,menoj kai. u`perairo,menoj evpi. pa,nta lego,menon qeo.n h' se,basma w[ste auvto.n eivj to.n nao.n tou/ qeou/ kaqi,sai avpodeiknu,nta e`auto.n o[ti e;stin qeo,j / “who opposes and exalts himself against every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, proclaiming himself to be God” (ESV). 85. On 2 Thess 2:1–12, see Earl J. Richard, First and Second Thessalonians (ed. Daniel J. Harrington; SP 11; Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2007), 322–37; Leon Morris, The First and Second Epistles to the Thessalonians (rev. ed.; NICNT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1991), 212–36; James Everett Frame, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistles of St. Paul to the Thessalonians (ICC; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1912), 242–76; F. F. Bruce, “2 Thessalonians,” in Donald Guthrie, J. A. Motyer, A. M. Stibbs and D. J. Wiseman, eds., The New Bible Commentary Revised (3rd ed.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1984), 1163–64; Gerhardus Vos, The Pauline Eschatology (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1961). 86. Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 53.54–55. See also Foerster, TDNT 7:173. 87. BDAG, 917. 88. Thayer, New Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon, 572. 89. The word se,basma is used in the context of worshipping idols in Wis 14:20; 15:17; Bel 27 (Theodotion). Josephus, Ant. 18.344 also uses se,basma to describe idols as the objects of worship. Unless otherwise noted, citations of Greek text from the LXX from this point forward are taken from Alfred Rahlfs, ed., Septuaginta (Stuttgart: Württembergische Bibelanstalt / Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1935). 90. Foerester, TDNT 7:173 raises the question, “The ༧ is surprising. If Paul has already made his statement very general with the ›ඥဎࠗǓड़ࣹ͘ཬࢆ͘ဎ‫ڗ‬ဎ۟͘ཬဎ, what can he be mentioning alongside this with an ༧?” The disjunctive particle does serve a purpose here by emphatically associating any so-called god with an object of worship. The reference to ड़ࣹ͘ཬࢆ͘ဎ‫ڗ‬ဎ ۟͘ཬဎis similar to 1 Cor 8:5 where Paul uses this term to dismissively refer to the gods of the Greco-Roman world in counter distinction to the one God who is worshipped by Christians (1 Cor 8:4, 6). Is it possible that the writer seeks to convey here the idea that only the one who is rightly called “God” is the legitimate object of worship, namely, the God whom Christians worship? James Frame suggests that Paul used ड़ࣹ͘ཬࢆ͘ဎ‫ڗ‬ဎ۟͘ཬဎ “to prevent the possibility of putting the would-be gods on a level with the true God.” Frame, Epistles of St. Paul to the Thessalonians, 255. Frame, however, admits here that whether God is also meant to be included in this phrase is “uncertain.” Henry Alford argued that the true God is included in this phrase. Henry Alford, The New Testament for English Readers (Cambridge: Deighton, Bell, 1865), 2:501. 91. Outside of Paul, I note that the Fourth Gospel contains criteria to establish what true worship of God entailed. Jesus in his dialogue with the Samaritan woman says in John 4:23–24, 23

avlla. e;rcetai w[ra kai. nu/n evstin o[te oi` avlhqinoi. proskunhtai. proskunh,sousin tw/| patri. evn pneu,mati kai. avlhqei,a|\ kai. ga.r o` path.r toiou,touj zhtei/ tou.j proskunou/ntaj auvto,n 24 pneu/ma o` qeo,j kai. tou.j proskunou/ntaj auvto.n evn pneu,mati kai.

NOTES

| 305

avlhqei,a| dei/ proskunei/n / “23 But the hour is coming, and is now here, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for the Father seeks such as these to worship him. 24 God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth” (NRSV).

92.

93. 94.

95. 96. 97.

98.

Jesus speaks about the kind of worship that God desires. The “true worshippers” (oi` avlhqinoi. proskunhtai.) are those who worship the Father “in spirit and truth” (evn pneu,mati kai. avlhqei,a), and it is these type of worshippers the Father seeks to worship him. The worship of God is seen in terms of being in spirit and in truth. The implication here is that the false worshippers are those who do not worship God in spirit and truth. The use of the dative in John 4:23–24 (evn pneu,mati kai. avlhqei,a) as in Rom 1:9 refers to the sphere of worship, namely, that worship should be rendered to God in the sphere of spirit and truth. See Leon Morris, The Gospel According to John (rev. ed.; NICNT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995), 239–40. Phil 3:2, Ble,pete tou.j ku,naj ble,pete tou.j kakou.j evrga,taj ble,pete th.n katatomh,n / “Beware of the dogs, beware of the evil workers, beware of those who mutilate the flesh!” (NRSV). Note the thrice mentioned warning ble,pete, “beware” or “watch out” (NIV) or “look out” (ESV, RSV). Paul’s reference to katatomh, is a hapax legomenon. On Phil 3:2, see O’Brien, Epistle to the Philippians, 351–57; Fee, Paul’s Letter to the Philippians, 293–97. Silva, Philippians, 148. The circumcision Paul speaks of here is one that is spiritual and effected by the Spirit of God (cf. Col 2:11). While Paul uses the pejorative term of mutilation in reference to the Judaizers, he can and does refer to unbelieving Jews generally as “the circumcision.” (Gal 2:7–9; cf. Col 4:11). Here I note that Paul reserved some of his severest and harshest criticism principally against the Judaizers, who in his mind were the agitators. O’Brien, Epistle to the Philippians, 358. J. Jeremias, TDNT 4:1101. Second Corinthians 11:2 says, zhlw/ ga.r u`ma/j qeou/ zh,lw| h`rmosa,mhn ga.r u`ma/j e`ni. avndri. parqe,non a`gnh.n parasth/sai tw/| Cristw/|  / “For I feel a divine jealousy for you, since I betrothed you to one husband, to present you as a pure virgin to Christ” (NRSV). See also Eph 5:22–33. On 2 Cor 11:2, see Paul Barnett, The Second Epistle to the Corinthians (NICNT; Grand Rapids; Cambridge, UK: Eerdmans, 1997), 496. The OT speaks of circumcision of the heart in Deut 10:16; 30:6 and Jer 4:4. In Deut 30:6, it states, “Moreover, the Lord your God will circumcise your heart and the heart of your descendants, so that you will love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul, in order that you may live” (NRSV). This text states that YHWH himself will circumcise the heart of his people so that they would love him with their heart and soul. On these OT texts, see John Reumann, Philippians: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (Anchor Yale Bible 33B; New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2008), 463. I have noted that to love God is to worship God. Love implies a personal relationship between two persons. In Mark 12:30 where Jesus quotes from the Shema, he lists as the first and greatest commandment to love God with all of one’s heart followed by loving God with all of one’s soul, mind, and strength. The heart (kardi,a) in particular can refer among other things to the “inner self,” which is the first

306

99. 100. 101. 102.

103.

104.

105. 106. 107. 108. 109. 110. 111. 112.

113.

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

meaning given to it in Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 26.3. The purpose of the circumcision of the heart [th.n kardi,an; LXX], the inner self according to Deut 30:6, is so that God’s people will love him with all their heart and soul; in short, that they will worship him. In Phil 3:3, Paul speaks of himself and his worshipping community as the circumcision, those who worship God in or by the Spirit. Here Paul makes the connection between circumcision and worship as Deut 30:6 does. Translation taken from James H. Charlesworth, ed., Old Testament Pseudepigrapha (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1985), 2:54. Philo, QG 3.46 (italics mine). Philo also cites from Deut 10:16, a text that refers to the circumcision of the heart. In Rom 15:16, Paul speaks of himself as being in the priestly service of the gospel in offering the Gentiles to God. Philo is aware of this and raises the question as to why circumcision is not commanded to women in Qge 3.47. Philo answers that circumcision has a perfunctory sexual role in men only that it does not have in women but Philo does not deal with the aspect of spiritual circumcision in women at all and is very unclear on this issue. The importance of women in the early Christian community is highlighted by Paul’s mention of many of them by name (Rom 16:1–3, 6, 15; 1 Cor 16:19; Phil 4:2–3; Phlm 2; cf. Col 4:15; 2 Tim 4:21). For a general study on purification rituals in the OT and Judaism, see Baruch J. Schwartz, David P. Wright, Jeffrey Stackert, and Naphtali S. Meshel, eds., Perspectives on Purity and Purification in the Bible (New York; London: T&T Clark, 2008); Hyam Maccoby, Ritual and Morality: The Ritual Purity System and its Place in Judaism (Cambridge; Cambridge University Press, 1999). Maccoby also treats the question of purity in the NT. Also translated “profane fire” (NKJV), “wrong kind of fire” (NLT), “unholy fire” (RSV, NRSV), pu/r avllo,trion / “strange fire” (LXX), “ignem alienum” / “strange fire” (Vulgate). See J. E. Hartley, Leviticus (WBC 4; Dallas: Word, 1992), 132–33. See Ps 15 which contains similar wording. Some translations render aw>v' as “idol” (NIV, NKJV; cf. NLT: “idols”). The noun aw>v' can also be translated “idol.” See BDB, 996. Hans-Joachim Kraus, Psalms 1–59: A Continental Commentary (trans. Hilton C. Oswald; Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1988), 314. Kraus, Psalms 1–59, 314. Kraus, Psalms 1–59, 314. With the NRSV and ESV, so the majority of the translations. The difficulty here is a variant between the genitive and dative readings of qeo,j in the MSS. Some MSS have the reading pneu,mati qew|/ (ac D P Y 88 itd, ar vg syrp, h goth eth Speculum) and the others pneu,mati qeou/ (a A B C Dc G K 33 81 614 1739 itg syrhmg copsa, bo al). The latter reading is preferred as original. See Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament (2nd ed.; Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2002), 547. In Phil 3:3, “it is clearly the Holy Spirit who is in view.” Markus N. A. Bockmuehl, The Epistle to the Philippians (Black’s New Testament Commentary 11; London: A&C Black, 1998). Fee, Paul’s Letter to the Philippians, 49.

NOTES

| 307

114. Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 33.368 gives the primary meaning of kauca,omai as “to boast.” 115. Stanley, Boasting in the Lord, 47; Stephen E. Fowl, Philippians (Two Horizon New Testament Commentary; Grand Rapids; Cambridge, UK: Eerdmans, 2005), 149. The idea of “boasting in the Lord” is repeated twice elsewhere by Paul in 1 Cor 1:31 and 2 Cor 10:17. In 1 Cor 1:31, Paul directly quotes from Jer 9:24 and alludes to it in 2 Cor 10:17. Jeremiah 9:24 reads, hw"hy ynIa] yKi ytiAa [:doy"w> lKef.h; lLeh;t.Mih; lLeh;t.yI tazOB.-~ai yKi / “but let those who boast boast in this, that they understand and know me, that I am the Lord” (MT / NRSV). In LXX, Jer 9:24 says, avllV h" evn tou,tw| kauca,sqw o` kaucw,menoj suni,ein kai. ginw,skein o[ti evgw, eivmi ku,rioj / “but let him that boasts boast in this, the understanding and knowing that I am the Lord.” The idea of understanding and knowing the Lord on the part of the worshipper implies a personal relationship. 116. Fee, Pauline Christology, 408. Fee here (and in p. 409) mistakenly attributes Paul’s reference to “boasting in Christ Jesus” to Phil 3:4 when it is actually Phil 3:3 where the phrase appears. See also Reumann, Philippians, 465. 117. Fee, Pauline Christology, 408. Fee also notes here the Pauline appropriation of a YHWH text (Jer 9:23–24) to the risen Jesus (409). See also Capes, Old Testament Yahweh Texts in Paul’s Christology, 134–35. 118. O’Brien, Epistle to the Philippians, 360. 119. See Fee, Paul’s Letter to the Philippians, 301–5. 120. Metzger, Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, 494 states concerning this variant: “The words ta. e;qnh, though attested by î46vid a A C P Y 33 81 1739 al, were considered to be an ancient gloss, introduced lest the reader assume that the subject of qu,ousin (bis) is VIsrah.l kata. sa,rka (ver. 18). The presence of ta. e;qnh prompted a subsequent modification in the substitution of . . . qu,ei . . . qu,ei (K 88 326 614 Byz Lect), introduced by grammatically-minded scribes to accord with a neuter plural subject. In the interest of greater clarity, the words kai. ouv qew|/ were transposed in several witnesses (D F Ggr) to follow the second qu,ousin.” 121. Paul began the subject of food offered to idols in 1 Cor 8 and continues in 1 Cor 10. 122. Conzelmann, 1 Corinthians, 173. 123. Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 5.15. See 4 Macc. 5:2 for the first appearance of eivdwlo,qutoj. 124. Morris, First Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians, 144. 125. Kraus, Psalms 1–59, 314. 126. Conzelmann, 1 Corinthians, 173. The equivalent identification of demons with idols is seen in LXX Ps 95:5, o[ti pa,ntej oi` qeoi. tw/n evqnw/n daimo,nia o` de. ku,rioj tou.j ouvranou.j evpoi,hsen / “for all the gods of the nations (Gentiles) are demons, but the Lord made the heavens” (author’s translation). The MT (Ps 96:5) identifies the gods of the nations or Gentiles as ~yli_ylia/ / idols. In comparing the LXX and MT of Ps 95 / 96 one can see the progression from gods à idols à demons with the result that these terms at least in Second Temple Judaism later become synonymous as in the following: gods = idols = demons. Is it possible that Paul may have had LXX Ps 95:5 in mind when he identifies idols with demons in 1 Cor 10:19–20?

308

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

127. This can also be seen by Luke in Acts 14:8–18. When Paul and Barnabas visit Lystra, a crippled man is healed by Paul. This act astounds the people of Lystra, and they declare that the gods have come down to them in human form. They identify Barnabas as Zeus and Paul as Hermes. The priest of Zeus brings bulls to sacrifice to both Paul and Barnabas whom they think to be gods in human form. Both Paul and Barnabas refuse this act and affirm that they too are human, thus rejecting the notion that they deserve sacrifices and hence worship. This demonstrates that the level of action of sacrificing is a religious one because the intended object(s) is perceived to be divine. The act of sacrifice in this case denotes worship. 128. Euripides, Bacch. 44–45. Dionysus is quoted as saying, Ka,dmoj me.n ou=n ge,raj te kai. turanni,da Penqei/ di,dwsi qugatro.j evkpefuko,ti, o]j qeomacei/ ta. kat’ evme. kai. spondw/n a;po wvqei/ m v,evneuvcai/j t’ ouvdamou/ mnei,an e;cei. / “Now Kadmos has given his honor and power to Pentheus, his daughter’s son, who fights against the gods as far as I am concerned and drives me away from sacrifices, and in his prayers makes no mention of me.” 129. Euripides, Bacch. 47, 366, qeo.j gegw.j / “I was born a god” . . . tw/| Bakci,w| ga.r tw/| Dio.j douleute,on / “for we must serve Bacchus, the son of Zeus.” On Dionysus as son of Zeus, see also Euripides, Bacch. 466, 1340. On Dionysus, see John M. Dillon, “Dionysus,” ABD 2:201–2; Calvin J. Roetzel, The Letters of Paul: Conversations in Context (5th ed.; Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2009), 34–36. 130. The distinction between the human subject (minor) who worships the divine or superhuman object (major) is also seen in Euripides, Bacch. 794–95: qu,oim’ a;n auvtw/| ma/llon h; qumou,menoj pro.j ke,ntra lakti,zoimi qnhto.j w;n qew/| /“I would sacrifice to the god rather than kick against his spurs in anger, a mortal against a god.” The distinction is seen here in the contrast between “a mortal” and “a god.” It is the mortal who sacrifices or performs the level of action. 131. Philo, Mos. 2.162. Philo deals here with the incident of the worship of the golden calf (cf. Exod 32). Also see Philo, Spec. 3.125. 132. Robertson and Plummer, First Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians, 216. 133. Fee, Pauline Christology, 132. 134. Fee, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 475; Brown, Introduction to the New Testament, 521–22. 135. Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 34.6. 136. Joseph A. Fitzmyer, First Corinthians A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (Anchor Yale Bible 32; New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2008), 393. 137. Gregory K. Beale, We Become What We Worship: A Biblical Theology of Idolatry (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2008), 227. 138. Homer, Od. 3.40–50. 139. Morris, First Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians, 145. 140. Taussig says that “the word koinonia, along with its root and derivative forms, was often synonymous with—indeed the name for—the associations that met together for meals.” Hal Taussig, In the Beginning Was the Meal: Social Experimentation and Early Christian Identity (Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 2009), 49–50.

NOTES

| 309

141. Taussig, In the Beginning Was the Meal, 19. See also Dennis E. Smith, From Symposium to Eucharist: The Banquet in the Early Christian World (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2003). 142. Taussig, In the Beginning Was the Meal, 22. 143. Taussig, In the Beginning Was the Meal, 169. 144. See Taussig, In the Beginning Was the Meal, 168–71. 145. Plato, Resp. 1.329a speaks about people of a common group or conviction, in this case an elderly men, gathering together to share their common experiences: Polla,kij ga.r sunerco,meqa, tinej eivj tauvto.n paraplhsi,an h`liki,an e;conte,j diasw,|zontej th.n palaia.n paroimi,an oi` ou=n plei/stoi h`mw/n ovlofu,rontai sunio,nte,j ta.j evn th/| neo,thti h`dona.j poqou/ntej kai. avnamimnh|sko,menoi peri, te tavfrodi,sia kai. peri. po,touj te kai. euvwci,aj kai. a;ll’ a;tta a[ tw/n toiou,twn e;cetai, kai. avganaktou/ sin w`j mega,lwn tinw/n avpesterhme,noi kai. to,te me.n eu= zw/nte,j nu/n de. ouvde. zw/nte.j For it often happens that some of us elders of about the same age come together and verify the old saw of like to like. At these reunions most of us make lament, longing for the lost joys of youth and recalling to mind the pleasures of wine, women, and feasts, and other things thereto appertaining, and they repine in the belief that the greatest things have been taken from them and that then they lived well and now it is no life at all. 146. Stephen G. Wilson, “Voluntary Associations: An Overview,” in John S. Kloppenborg and Stephen G. Wilson, Voluntary Associations in the Graeco-Roman World (New York: Routledge, 1996), 12. On the relationship between meals and associations, see Taussig, In the Beginning Was the Meal, 91–102. 147. This was the charge brought against Jesus in the Synoptic Gospels, that in eating with the tax collectors and sinners he had socially welcomed and accepted them (Mark 2:15–16; Matt 9:10–11; 11:19; Luke 5:29–30; 7:34; 15:2). Also note Rev 3:20 where the risen Christ invites the church in Laodicea to open the door when they hear his voice as he knocks so that he could come in and “dine” (NASB), or “sup” (KJV), with them and they with him, thereby indicating “the most intimate fellowship possible.” Ladd, Commentary on the Revelation of John, 67–68. Paul understood the notion that eating with someone indicated acceptance of the person, for example, in Gal 2:11–14 where he rebukes Cephas/Peter for removing himself from eating with the Gentiles for religious reasons because of the arrival of certain men from James, i.e., Jewish believers. Formerly, Cephas ate at table with Gentiles thus indicating his acceptance of them and fellowship with them. See Ronald Y. K. Fung, The Epistle to the Galatians (NICNT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988), 104–11; Frank J. Matera, Galatians (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2007), 84–92; Aune, “Worship, Early Christian,” ABD 6:984. 148. Taussig, In the Beginning Was the Meal, 77. 149. Taussig, In the Beginning Was the Meal, 77. 150. Taussig, In the Beginning Was the Meal, 109–10. 151. Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 88.164.

310

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

152. Fee, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 473n55. Here Fee also notes that Paul is indicating that the condition of the Corinthians is no better than that of ancient Israel’s. 153. Robertson and Plummer, First Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians, 218. 154. The Vulgate has “gentes.” 155. See Metzger, Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, 494. 156. Fee, Pauline Christology, 455–56. Fee accepts the Pauline authorship of the Pastorals. 157. Capes, Old Testament Yahweh Texts in Paul’s Christology, 148. On the transference of the name YHWH to the risen Jesus as “Lord’ here, see Philip H. Towner, The Letters to Timothy and Titus (NICNT; Grand Rapids: Cambridge: Eerdmans, 2006), 535. 158. Bietenhard, TDNT 5:282. 159. Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 33.133. The idea of uttering a name in a ritual context can be related to the Christian rite of baptism where the confession “Jesus is Lord” was most likely uttered by the believer. See C.  E.  B. Cranfield, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans (London; New York: T&T Clark, 1975), 1:166–67. 160. Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 53.62 (italics mine). Second Timothy 2:19 is cited here as an example of this definition. 161. Towner, Letters to Timothy and Titus, 536–37. 162. Fee, Pauline Christology, 458. See also Towner, Letters to Timothy and Titus, 545. 163. Daniel B. Wallace, The Basics of New Testament Syntax: An Intermediate Greek Grammar (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2000), 169. An example of this use of the preposition meta, is seen in 1 John 1:3, o] e`wra,kamen kai. avkhko,amen avpagge,llomen kai. u`mi/n i[na kai. u`mei/j koinwni,an e;chte meq h`mw/n kai. h` koinwni,a de. h` h`mete,ra meta. tou/ patro.j kai. meta. tou/ ui`ou/ auvtou/ VIhsou/ Cristou/ / “we announce to you what we have seen and heard in order that you also may have fellowship with us; and indeed our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ.” The writer stresses the two-dimensional aspects in worship, the horizontal and the vertical. He first mentions the fellowship believers have with one another (horizontal aspect) and invites the reader(s) to share in that fellowship “with us” (meq h`mw/n), and secondly, he mentions that the fellowship he has with the believers is “with the Father (meta. tou/ patro.j) and with his Son (meta. tou/ ui`ou/ auvtou) Jesus Christ” (vertical aspect). It should be noted that just as in Paul, 1 John also has what appears to be an objective “binitarian” statement wherein the objects of their fellowship is God (“the Father”) and Jesus Christ (“his Son”). John Stott rightly notes that the fellowship which Christian believers have with one another is predicated on the fellowship that they have with the Father and the Son. John R. W. Stott, The Letters of John: An Introduction and Commentary (Tyndale New Testament Commentaries; Leicester, UK: Inter-Varsity Press; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988), 68. Paul also makes a similar statement in 1 Cor 8:6 where he speaks of believers being in relationship to the one God the Father, and the one Lord Jesus Christ. 164. This point is accepted by most interpreters. See Fee, Pauline Christology, 458n128 who lists a number of references in support. 165. Hurtado, At the Origins of Christian Worship, 79; See also Towner, Letters to Timothy and Titus, 545.

NOTES

| 311

166. Raymond F. Collins, 1 & 2 Timothy and Titus: A Commentary (New Testament Library; Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2002), 241. 167. Collins, 1 & II Timothy and Titus, 241 (italics mine). 168. Having a pure heart is also mentioned in 1 Tim 1:5 where the writer speaks of love issuing forth from a kaqara/j kardi,aj / “pure heart.” The context, like that of 2 Tim 2:22 (2:14–23), is also one of warning against false teachers. 169. The question of authenticity in worship is alluded to in Col 2:23 where the word evqeloqrhski,a appears and means “self-imposed religion” and “arbitrary worship .  .  . worship which one devises and prescribes for himself.” Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 53.12; Thayer, New Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon, 168. The KJV and ASV translate this word as “will worship” and the ESV and NASB translate it “self-made religion.” The Vulgate uses “superstitio” to translate this word. Schmidt notes about this term that “[i]t is a piety which does not keep to the reality.” K. L. Schmidt, TDNT 3:159. This indicates that some forms of worship are not legitimate or genuine but are inappropriately exercised. 170. Deut 10:16; 30:6; Jer 4:4. See Reumann, Philippians, 463. 171. On the study of family language employed by Paul in his letters, see Daniel von Allmen, La Famille de Dieu: La Symbolique Familiale dans Le Paulinisme (Orbis biblicus et orientalis 41; Fribourg: Éditions Universitaires; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1981); Brendan Byrne, “Sons of God”—“Seed of Abraham”: A Study of the Idea of the Sonship of All Christians in Paul against the Jewish Background (Analecta biblica 83; Rome: Biblical Institure, 1979); Stanley  E. Porter, “Family in the Epistles,” in Family in the Bible: Exploring Customs, Culture and Context (ed. Richard  S. Hess and M.  Daniel Carroll R.; Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2003), 148–66; Peter Balla, The Child-Parent Relationship in the New Testament and Its Environment (WUNT 1/155; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2003); R. Aasgard, “Paul as a Child: Children and Childhood in the Letters of the Apostle,” JBL 126 (2007): 129–59; R. Aasgard, My Beloved Brothers and Sisters! Christian Siblingship in Paul (Early Christianity in Context: JSNTSup 265; London and New York: T&T Clark, 2004); Caroline Johnson Hodge, If Sons, Then Heirs: A Study of Kinship and Ethnicity in the Letters of Paul (New York: Oxford University Press, 2007); Philip A. Harland, “Familial Dimensions of Group Identity: ‘Brothers’ (෕˗͘ड़‫ڗݵ‬ໆ) in Associations of the Greek East,” JBL 124.3 (2005): 491–513. 172. On the expression “in Christ,” see Adolf Deissmann, Die Neutestamentliche Formel “in Christo Jesu” (Marburg: N. G. Elwert, 1892). In addition to the expression or phrase “in Christ,” there is also the repeated Pauline phrase “in the Spirit.” On these two expressions or phrases, see Andrie Du Toit, “‘In Christ’, ‘in the Spirit’ and Related Prepositional Phrases: Their Relevance for a Discussion on Pauline Mysticism,” Neotestamentica 34.2 (2000): 287–98. 173. Paul’s emphasis is not on the fatherhood of God over all believers but is rather particularly on the fatherhood of God in relation to Jesus. A. T. Wainwright, The Trinity in the New Testament (London: SPCK, 1962), 41–50. God is Father of believers only because he is first and foremost the God and Father of Jesus. In the OT, the title of God as father was also linked to his identity as creator (Mal 2:10). Hurtado notes that this expression of

312

174.

175. 176. 177. 178.

179.

180.

181.

182.

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

God as the God and Father of Christ is a parallel with the OT designation of YHWH as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (Exod 3:6). Hurtado, At the Origins of Christian Worship, 74. On the adoption motif in Paul, see Trevor J. Burke, “Adopted as Sons (uivoqesi,a): The Missing Piece in Pauline Soteriology,” in Porter, ed., Paul, 259–87; Trevor  J. Burke, Adopted into God’s Family: Exploring a Pauline Metaphor (New Studies in Biblical Theology; Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2006); Trevor  J. Burke, “The Characteristics of Paul’s Adoptive Sonship (HUIOTHESIA) Motif,” Irish Biblical Studies 17 (1995): 62–74; Trevor J. Burke, “Pauline Adoption: A Sociological Approach,” Evangelical Quarterly 73.2 (2001): 119–34; D.  J. Theron, “‘Adoption’ in the Pauline Corpus,” Evangelical Quarterly 28.1 (1956): 6–14. Hurtado, At the Origins of Christian Worship, 74. Stanley, Boasting in the Lord, 77. Neyrey, Give God the Glory, 69. Neyrey, Give God the Glory, 69. Neyrey here also rightfully points out that James Barr’s well known treatment of Abba not meaning “Daddy” is reinforced by the fact that the paternal title of God as “Father” in Paul’s first-century culture “demanded of him [God] duties quite unlike those of modern paternal figures.” The emphasis of “Father” or “Abba” hence was on “respect, not affection.” For a general study on the household and family religion in the first century and before, see John Bodel and Saul M. Olyan, eds., Household and Family Religion in Antiquity (Oxford: Blackwell, 2008). On Paul’s reference to the “holy kiss” see Rom 16:16; 1 Cor 16:20; 2 Cor 13:12; 1 Thess 5:26. On the significance of the “holy kiss” as a social-cultural expression of familial ties, see Neyrey, Give God the Glory, 233–34; W. Klassen, “The Sacred Kiss in the New Testament: An Example of Social Boundary Lines,” NTS 39 (1993): 122–35. Paul F. Bradshaw, Reconstructing Early Christian Worship (London: SPCK, 2009), 21–22. Bradshaw goes on to mention here that the family ties among early Christians was so close that they refused to exchange kisses any longer with members of their natural family who were unbelievers. On the use of the ritual kiss in early Christianity, see L. Edward Philips, The Ritual Kiss in Early Christian Worship (Alcuin/GROW; Joint Liturgical Study 36; Nottingham: Grove Books, 1996). The concept of a particular “church” building would be semantically anachronistic for Paul as evkklhsi,a only later came to designate buildings of Christian worship in Church history. Paul’s faith communities assembled in the homes or houses of their fellow believers. The word evkklhsi,a is used sixty-two times in the Pauline corpus. Dunn, Theology of Paul, 537n15. It always emphasized an assembly of people in the Pauline letters. Xavier Léon-Dufour, Dictionary of the New Testament (trans. Terrence Prendergast; San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1980), 134–35. Also see Schmidt, “evkklhsi,a,” in TDNT 3:506–13. The notion of sibling relationships within the Christian faith community seems to be carried over from the OT. This is noted by von Soden: “There can be no doubt, however, that avdelfo,j is one of the religious titles of the people of Israel taken over by the Christian community.” H. F. von Soden, TDNT 1:145. This notion of sibling relationships in

NOTES

183. 184.

185.

186. 187.

188.

189. 190.

191.

| 313

crosscultural contexts is also attested in Greco-Roman literature: Plato, Menex. 238e-239a; Xenophon, Anab. 7.2.25; Plotinus, Enn. 2.9.18. On Paul’s use of sibling language, see further Andrew D. Clarke, “Equality of Mutuality? Paul’s Use of ‘Brother’ Language,” in The New Testament in Its First Century Setting. Essays on Context and Background in Honour of B. W. Winter on His 65th Birthday (ed. P. J. Williams, Andrew D. Clarke, Peter  M. Head and David Instone-Brewer; Grand Rapids; Cambridge, UK: Eerdmans, 2004), 151–64. On family metaphors in Paul, see Trevor J. Burke, Family Matters: A Socio-Historical Study of Kinship Metaphors in 1 Thessalonians (JSNTSup 247; London: T&T Clark, 2003). On Paul’s relationship to his faith communities as that of “father,” see Trevor J. Burke, “Paul as ‘Father’ to his Corinthian ‘Children’ in Socio-Historical Context (1 Cor 4:14– 21),” in Paul and the Corinthians: Studies on a Community in Conflict; Essays in Honour of Margaret Thrall (ed. Trevor J. Burke and J. Keith Elliott; NovTSup 109; Leiden: Brill, 2003), 95–113; Eva-Maria Lassen, “The Use of the Father Image in Imperial Propaganda and 1 Corinthians 4:14–21,” Tyndale Bulletin 42.1 (1991): 127–36. Although I cite Greco-Roman sources for support here, I note that Paul would have also understood God in a familial context from the OT description of God as being in covenant with Israel as her father, but also as her husband (Jer 31:32). God is referred to as “father” of Israel in Deut 32:6, 18; Isa 63:16; 64:8; Mal 2:10; cf. Exod 4:22. Aristotle, Eth. nic. 8.xi.2–3 (italics mine). Of course this dependence of the child on the parent is admittedly temporal as it concerns the child as an underage dependent prior to achieving adulthood and becoming independent. Prior to the fall the creation mandate of Gen 2:24 presumed marriage as normative and the dependence within parent-child relationship as temporary by design. The temporal nature of this relationship is also seen in the fact that with the passage of time and the aging process the aged parents inevitably become dependent on their adult children to aid and support them as well as provide for them. Notwithstanding this situation the parents even in their old age are still deserving of honor and service because of their status and identity as parents. Phillipians 4:19 says, o` de. qeo,j mou plhrw,sei pa/san crei,an u`mw/n kata. to. plou/toj auvtou/ evn do,xh| evn Cristw/| VIhsou/ / “And my God will supply every need of yours according to his riches in glory in Christ Jesus” (ESV). See also 2 Cor 9:10 where Paul speaks of God as the one who provides or supplies seed for the sower and bread for food. 1 Thess 4:9, ga.r u`mei/j qeodi,daktoi, evste eivj to. avgapa/n avllh,louj / “for you yourselves have been taught by God to love one another” (NRSV). This idea is present in 1  John 5:1: kai. pa/j o` avgapw/n to.n gennh,santa avgapa/| to.n gegennhme,non evx auvtou/  / “and everyone who loves the Father [“parent”; NRSV, RSV; “Him who begot”; NKJV] loves whoever has been born of him” (ESV). Here we see that the basis for one’s love for another spiritual sibling is grounded on one’s love for the source of that sibling, namely, God. If one loves God the heavenly parent, one should also love those who are his children, for they come from him and find their source in him. A similar thought is found in 1 John 4:11 (cf. John 13:34–35; 15:12, 17): VAgaphtoi, eiv ou[twj o` qeo.j hvga,phsen h`ma/j kai. h`mei/j ovfei,lomen avllh,louj avgapa/n / “Beloved, since God

314

192.

193. 194.

195.

196.

197. 198.

199.

200.

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

loved us so much, we also ought to love one another” (NRSV). This notion appears to have been a common source for early Christian believers as it is first attested in Paul and then later in the Johannine literature. What is common between Paul and John is that God is the source and paradigm role model of the relationship believers should have with each other. As such if God loves believers, then believers ought to love one another, if God forgives believers, then believers ought to forgive one another, if God is gracious, then believers ought to be gracious to one another. God thus becomes the parental role model. Paul in Phil 2:3–4 calls on believers not to esteem themselves better than others, but actually calls them to esteem others as better than themselves. In so doing, Paul ends up balancing the scales as it were, for if all believers esteem others as better than themselves, then all are treated equally by way of reciprocity. Bruce, Epistle to the Colossians, to Philemon, and to the Ephesians, 324. Scott S. Bartchy argues that more or less of a third of all people in Paul’s social world were slaves and were bought and sold. Scott S. Bartchy, “Slavery: New Testament,” ABD 6:67. On the subject of Paul and slavery, see John Byron, Recent Research on Paul and Slavery (Sheffield, UK: Sheffield Phoenix, 2008); Scott S. Barchy, First-Century Slavery in 1 Corinthians 7:21 (Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation Series 11; Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1973); Michaels Parsons, “Slavery and the New Testaments Equality and Submissiveness,” Vox Evangelica 18 (1988): 90–96; F. Lyall, “Roman Law in the Writings of Paul: The Slave and Freedman,” NTS 17 (1970–1971): 73–79; and Claus Westermann, Slave Systems of Greek and Roman Antiquity (Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society, 1955). See E. R. Goodenough, “Paul and Onesimus,” Harvard Theological Review 22 (1929): 181–83; William J. Richardson, “Principle and Context in the Ethics of the Epistle to Philemon,” Interpretation 22 (1968): 301–16. The full text of Gal 3:28 reads, ouvk e;ni VIoudai/oj ouvde. {Ellhn ouvk e;ni dou/loj ouvde. evleu,qeroj ouvk e;ni a;rsen kai. qh/lu\ pa,ntej ga.r u`mei/j ei-j evste evn Cristw/| VIhsou/ / “There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus.” Ethnic boundaries (Jew/Greek), vocational boundaries (slave/free), and sexual gender boundaries (male/female) are removed in Christ to establish the unity of the faith community. The Greek text literally reads, ui`oi. qeou/ / “sons of God.” Paul continues to utilize family language even in Gal 4:4–6 where God is called “Abba” and “Father” to Christian believers. This indicates that Paul has the family context in mind and uses it to underscore the equality of Christian believers as spiritual siblings to one another. Paul’s acceptance of Onesimus as a spiritual member of the family is also seen in Paul’s willingness to cover any charges or debts Onesimus has accrued to his own account (Phlm 18). Some translations translate the adjective avgaphto,j in Phlm 1 as “beloved friend” (NIV, NET, NRSV). See also Rom 16:5 (NJB, NIV, NET, NLT). The adjective avgaphto,j functions as a substantive here and can imply a friend but not explicitly so as varying

NOTES

| 315

translations indicate. Louw and Nida define this term as “pertaining to one who or that which is loved—‘object of one’s affection, one who is loved, beloved, dear.’” Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 25.45. 201. The idea of friendship with God is attested in Isa 41:8 (cf. Jas 2:23) where Abraham is called by God “my friend” (ybih]ao ~h'r"b.a;; MT / Abraam o]n hvga,phsa; LXX). Abraham is also called God’s friend in 2 Chr 20:7 and LXX Dan 3:35. This indicates that Abraham and God can be in a relationship as friends. However, this relationship is not an equal one, as God is the protector, provider, and master of Abraham. In John 15:15, Jesus tells his disciples that he no longer calls them servants but “friends.” While servants do not know nor have the right to know the business of their master or lord, friends are privy to that information. Jesus thus associates friendship with direct and honest disclosure of information. The disciples are Jesus’ friends because he shares with them what the Father has revealed to him. Thus a mark of friendship in this case denotes a sharing of information between two parties. See John Marsh, The Gospel of Saint John (London: Penguin Books, 1968), 526; B. F. Westcott, The Gospel According to St. John: With Introduction and Notes (London: John Murray, Albemarle Street, 1882), 220–21.

Chapter Four: Description of Pauline Worship in Light of Language 1. Henry G. Liddell and Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1980), 25526. This meaning is found in Xenophon (Cyrop. 3.1.36; Anab. 6.1.22). 2. Walter Bauer, Frederick Danker, William Arndt and F. Wilbur Gingrich, eds., The Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (3rd ed.; Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 587. 3. Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 53.14. 4. Liddell and Scott, Greek-English Lexicon, 25526. Also see H. Strathmann, TDNT 4:59. 5. Plato, Apol. 23c; Phaed. 244e. See also Euripides, Ion 129, 152. 6. BDB, 713. 7. Sanday and Headlam, Epistle to the Romans, 20. Also see BDAG, 587. 8. Strathmann, TDNT 4:59. 9. Strathmann, TDNT 4:62. There are two exceptions to the rule. The verb latreu,w is used twice in the LXX Deut 28:48 and LXX Dan 7:14. In Deut 28:48 where among the curses which are issued for disobedience of the law, the Israelites are told kai. latreu,seij toi/j evcqroi/j sou ou]j evpapostelei/ ku,rioj evpi. se, / “And thou shalt serve thine enemies, which the Lord will send forth against thee.” In this passage the enemies of the Israelites would be the referents of latreu,w. In Dan 7:14, kai. evdo,qh auvtw/| evxousi,a kai. pa,nta ta. e;qnh th/j gh/j kata. ge,nh kai. pa/sa do,xa auvtw/| latreu,ousa kai. h` evxousi,a auvtou/ evxousi,a aivw,nioj h[tij ouv mh. avrqh/| kai. h` basilei,a auvtou/ h[tij ouv mh. fqarh/| / “And to him [one like a son of man] was given the dominion, and the honour, and the kingdom; and all nations, tribes, and languages, shall serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom shall not be destroyed.” But note LXX Dan 7:14 (Theodotion)

316

10. 11. 12.

13. 14.

15. 16.

17. 18.

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

which has, kai. pa,ntej oi` laoi, fulai, glw/ssai auvtw/| douleu,sousin / “and all the peoples, tribes, tongues will serve him.” Theodotion has douleu,w a weaker term for worship instead of latreu,w, which is specifically used of the worship or service of God or gods. The word douleu,w on the other hand can have a general application which does not necessitate the object served to be God. Strathmann, TDNT 4:63. Strathmann, TDNT 4:63. Strathmann, TDNT 4:60. Strathman further notes, “The Purely Religious Character of the Word as Determined by the LXX. The influence of the LXX may be seen in the fact that the word never refers to human relations, let alone to secular services. The ministry denoted by ड़Ǔࠗ‫͘ݰ‬࿱͘Ԇဎ is always offered to God (or to heathen gods . . .).” Strathmann, TDNT 4:62. O’Brien, Epistle to the Philippians, 360. William Barclay, The Letter to the Romans (2nd ed.; Daily Study Bible; Edinburgh: Saint Andrew Press, 1957), 169. See also comments in Hurtado, At the Origins of Christian Worship, 65. BDAG, 587. Sometimes latreu,w can be used with other words which denote worship. A non-Pauline example of this is found in Q (Matt 4:10; Luke 4:8) where Jesus rebukes Satan and tells him that one is to “worship” (proskune,w) God and serve (latreu,w) only him. As we shall see below proskune,w is not case specific (but general) as it can be used of other referents other than God; however, latreu,w is case specific here and means cultic service. While latreu,w is a strong word for worship due to its specificity, in comparison proskune,w is a weaker term. The context is essential to determine how proskune,w should be translated. Strathmann, TDNT 4:60. The only exception in the NT where latreu,w may be used of the risen Jesus is in Rev 22:3, kai. pa/n kata,qema ouvk e;stai e;ti kai. o` qro,noj tou/ qeou/ kai. tou/ avrni,ou evn auvth/| e;stai kai. oi` dou/loi auvtou/ latreu,sousin auvtw/|  / “No longer will there be anything accursed, but the throne of God and of the Lamb will be in it, and his servants will worship him” (ESV). The nearest antecedent to the pronoun auvtou/ is the Lamb (the risen Christ), but it is possible that both God and the Lamb may be the intended referents of latreu,sousin. The throne of God and the Lamb are spoken of in the singular (cf. Rev 22:1). Elsewhere in Revelation the risen Jesus is described as receiving blessing, honor, and glory with God (Rev 5:13). The risen Jesus is also spoken of as having priests as well as God having priests (Rev 20:6), which would imply that these priests render latreu,w to God and the risen Jesus as this verb is used of the service of the priests in the LXX, according to BDAG, 587 and Strathmann, TDNT 4:63. G. K. Beale, The Book of Revelation: A Commentary on the Greek Text (NIGTC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans; Carlisle, UK: Paternoster, 1999), 1113 comments, That “they will serve him” likely does not refer only to God or only to the Lamb. The two are conceived so much as a unit that the singular pronoun can refer to both . . . That both are sitting on only one throne and together form one temple

NOTES

| 317

(21:22) enhances their perceived unity. Also, this unity is highlighted by both having the titles “Alpha and Omega” (1:8; 21:6; 22:13). Such statements as these in 21:22 and 22:3 were among those that gave rise to later Trinitarian formulas. Richard Bauckham, The Theology of the Book of Revelation (ed. J. D. G. Dunn; New Testament Theoogy; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993), 60–61 also comments on this passage, Probably connected with this concern to include Jesus in the monotheistic worship is a peculiar grammatical usage elsewhere in Revelation, where mention of God and Christ together is followed by a singular verb (11:15) or singular pronouns (22:3–4 and 6:17, where the singular pronoun autou is the better reading). It is not clear whether the singular in these cases refers to God alone or to God and Christ together as a unity. John, who is very sensitive to the theological implications of language and even prepared to defy grammar for the sake of theology (cf. 1:4), may well intend the latter. But in either case, he is evidently reluctant to speak of God and Christ together as a plurality. He never makes them the subjects of a plural verb or uses a plural pronoun to refer to them both. The reason is surely clear: he places Christ on the divine side of the distinction between God and creation, but he wishes to avoid ways of speaking which sound to him polytheistic. The consistency of usage shows that he has reflected carefully on the relation of Christology to monotheism. It is significant that one of the passages in question (22:3–4) concerns worship. It should also be added that the words for worship in Paul are never used of or for the Holy Spirit. Stanley, Boasting in the Lord, 78. While I will examine some Pauline passages that include the risen Jesus in various expressions and acts of worship it should be stated that there are no such examples of worship or expressions or acts of worship being given to the Holy Spirit. In short, there is no evidence that the Holy Spirit was directly worshipped in the Pauline faith communities and the Pauline letters do not seem to show any indication that the Spirit was worshipped. While the Pauline letters exhibit evidence of triadic passages (Rom 8:1–4; 1 Cor 12:4–6; 2 Cor 13:13[14]; Gal 4:4–6; cf. Eph 1:3–14; 4:4–6; 2 Thess 2:13–14; Titus 3:4–6), Paul never makes the Holy Spirit a recipient of worship as he does with God. The Holy Spirit in Paul seems to play a subjective experiential role in Christian worship as Paul describes his communities as those “who worship by the Spirit of God” (Phil 3:3 ESV) but again is never the object or recipient of worship. The NET for Phil 3:3n5tc states that “the NT does not seem to speak of worshiping the Spirit explicitly” (italics in original). The closest one comes to seeing a possible reference to a form of worship by way of prayer to the Holy Spirit is in the sole passage of 2 Cor 13:13(14), a passage I will deal with below under “Wish Prayers.” On the significance of 2 Cor 13:13(14) and a full treatment of Pauline pneumatology see, Gordon D. Fee, God’s Empowering Presence: The Holy Spirit in the Letters of Paul (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1994), 362–65. 19. The NRSV and RSV have this passage as Rom 1:9. 20. Delling, Worship in the New Testament, xiii.

318

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

21. Moule, Worship in the New Testament, 7. 22. Sanday and Headlam, Epistle to the Romans, 20. 23. Sanday and Headlam, Epistle to the Romans, 20. Also see Moo, Epistle to the Romans, 58. The Greek text does not contain the word “announcing,” but it is implied and thus appears in the NRSV. NASB adds, “the preaching of the gospel of His Son” (cf. NET, NIV, NJB). On the dative of sphere, see Wallace, Basics of New Testament Syntax, 72. 24. For the various views of this Pauline expression, see Moo, Epistle to the Romans, 58 and Fee, God’s Empowering Presence, 485–86. There may be a similar understanding of Paul’s expression with the found in Mark 12:30 where Jesus quotes from the Shema and lists as the first and greatest commandment to love God with all of one’s heart followed by loving God with all of one’s soul, mind and strength. The heart (kardi,a) can refer among other things to the “inner self,” which is the first meaning given to it in Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 26.3. 25. The gospel is called by Paul both tw/| euvaggeli,w| tou/ Cristou/  / “the gospel of Christ” (1 Thess 3:2); to. euvagge,lion tou/ Cristou/ / “the gospel of Christ” (Gal 1:7; cf. Phil 1:27); and also to. euvagge,lion tou/ qeou/  / “the gospel of God” (1 Thess 2:2, 8–9; cf. Rom 1:1; Gal 3:8). Paul also calls the gospel, to. euvagge,lio,n mou / “my gospel” (Rom 2:16; 16:25; cf. 2 Tim 2:8). The reference to the gospel being that of both God and Jesus implies a close tie between the two. To believe in the gospel of Christ is to believe ipso facto in the gospel of God. Paul further believed that there was only one “gospel” (Gal 1:7–9; cf. 2 Cor 11:4). 26. See H. E. Dana and Julius R. Mantey, A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament (Toronto: Macmillan, 1955), 105–6. See also Maximilian Zerwick, Biblical Greek (Scripta Pontificii Instituti Biblici 114; Roma: Editrice Pontificio Instituto Biblico, 2001), 40; Wallace, Basics of New Testament Syntax, 167–68. Wallace notes that evn with the dative is rare in the NT. 27. Joseph A. Fitzmyer, Romans: A New Translation and Commentary (AB 33; New York: Doubleday, 1992), 244. Also see Peter Stuhlmacher, Paul’s Letter to the Romans: A Commentary (trans. Scott. J. Hafemann; Louisville: Wesminster  / John Knox Press, 1994), 27. 28. Brendan Byrne, Romans (ed. Daniel J. Harrington; SP 6; Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1996), 49. 29. Strathmann, TDNT 4:64. 30. A parallel example to this can be seen in John 16:2: avposunagw,gouj poih,sousin u`ma/j\ avll e;rcetai w[ra i[na pa/j o` avpoktei,naj Îu`ma/jÐ do,xh| latrei,an prosfe,rein tw/| qew/|  / “They will put you out of the synagogues. Indeed, the hour is coming when whoever kills you will think he is offering service to God” (ESV). In this text, Jesus predicts that those who kill his followers will think he is offering latrei,a, divine service to God. The very act of killing the followers of Jesus in this case constitutes service to God or doing what God desires. Even though the act is done towards the followers of Jesus, it is an act which is indirectly done in service to or in behalf of God. Thus in this case to do x (kill the followers of Jesus) is to do y (service to God). Later rabbinic writings associate the killing of Jewish apostates as offering service to God (Num. Rab. 21; m. Sanh. 9.6; Josephus,

NOTES

31.

32.

33. 34. 35. 36.

37.

38.

39.

| 319

Ant. 20.200; Mart. Poly. 13.1; Justin, Dial. 95.4; 133.6). See also the story of Phinehas in Num 25:1–15 and Mattathias in 1 Macc 2:19–28, which also involves the zealous killing of apostates to protect God’s honor. Paul also described himself as being zealous for the traditions of his fathers (Gal 1:14), and this may explain Paul’s former desire to eliminate the early Christian movement (1 Cor 15:9; cf. 1 Tim 1:13). First Cornithians 15:1–4 says, Gnwri,zw de. u`mi/n avdelfoi, to. euvagge,lion o] euvhggelisa,mhn u`mi/n o] kai. parela,bete evn w-| kai. e`sth,kate 2 di ou- kai. sw,|zesqe ti,ni lo,gw| euvhggelisa,mhn u`mi/n eiv kate,cete evkto.j eiv mh. eivkh/| evpisteu,sate 3 pare,dwka ga.r u`mi/n evn prw,toij o] kai. pare,labon o[ti Cristo.j avpe,qanen u`pe.r tw/n a`martiw/n h`mw/n kata. ta.j grafa,j 4 kai. o[ti evta,fh kai. o[ti evgh,gertai th/| h`me,ra| th/| tri,th| kata. ta.j grafa,j / “Now I would remind you, brothers and sisters, of the good news that I proclaimed to you, which you in turn received, in which also you stand, 2 through which also you are being saved, if you hold firmly to the message that I proclaimed to you—unless you have come to believe in vain. 3 For I handed on to you as of first importance what I in turn had received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures 4 and that he was buried, and that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures” (NRSV). “I handed on to you” (pare,dwka), “what I also received”(pare,labon). See also1 Cor 11:23 cf. 15:3. See Morris, First Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians, 201; Wright, Resurrection of the Son of God, 319n13. Fee, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 722. Gingrich and Danker, Shorter Lexicon of the Greek New Testament, 174. Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 65.52. On Paul’s view of the resurrection of Jesus, see Peter M. Head, “Jesus’ Resurrection in Pauline Thought: A Study in the Epistle to the Romans,” in Proclaiming the Resurrection: Papers from the First Oak Hill College Annual School of Theology (ed. P. M. Head; Carlisle: Paternoster, 1998), 58–80. On the significance of the death of Jesus in Paul, see Cousar, Theology of the Cross; James D. G. Dunn, “Paul’s Understanding of the Death of Jesus,” in Reconciliation and Hope: New Testament Essays on Atonement and Eschatology Presented to L.  L. Morris on His 60th Birthday (ed. Robert Banks; Carlisle: Paternoster, 1974), 125–41; and Giuseppe Pulcinelli, La morte di Gesù come espiazione: La concezione paolina (Studi sulla Bibbia e il suo ambiente; Milano: San Paolo, 2007). On the relationship of the resurrection of Jesus and soteriology, see D.  M. Stanley, Christ’s Resurrection in Pauline Soteriology (Rome: Biblical Institute, 1961). On the nature of the Christian gatherings in worship, see Valeriy A. Alikin, The Earliest History of the Christian Gathering: Origin, Development and Content of the Christian Gathering in the First to Third Centuries (Vigiliae Christianae Supplements 102; Leiden: Brill, 2010). Morris is therefore incorrect to maintain that the gospel of God’s Son, which Paul announces (Rom 1:9), “centers on Christ’s atoning act. Without that there would be no gospel.” Morris, Epistle to the Romans, 58. On the contrary, without the resurrection of Jesus the gospel would be rendered superfluous and empty (1 Cor 15:12–20). The atoning

320

40. 41.

42. 43.

44.

45. 46. 47. 48.

49. 50.

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

act of Jesus on the cross is only validated by the resurrection, for it is the resurrection of Jesus itself that gives the cross any soteriological significance. Hurtado, Lord Jesus Christ, 117; Thiselton, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 393. In the Pastoral Letters, we see something similar to Rom 1:9 in 2 Tim 1:3: Ca,rin e;cw tw/| qew/| w-| latreu,w avpo. progo,nwn evn kaqara/| suneidh,sei w`j avdia,leipton e;cw th.n peri. sou/ mnei,an evn tai/j deh,sesi,n mou nukto.j kai. h`me,raj / “I thank God whom I serve, as did my ancestors, with a clear conscience, as I remember you constantly in my prayers night and day” (ESV). As with Rom 1:9 this text speaks of Paul serving God in the religious context of latreu,w but also mentions his personal prayers for Timothy. In Rom 1:9 by contrast, the audience Paul prayed for was in the plural (u`mw/n), which was the church in Rome (Rom 1:7). Ernest Best, The Letter of Paul to the Romans (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1967), 13. Fitzmyer goes further than this and asserts, “Yet Paul’s very prayer for the Christians of Rome is an integral part of his worship of God.” Fitzmyer, Romans, 244; cf. 640. While the relation of prayer to worship may be implicit, Fitzmyer views it as explicit, which the text does not necessarily warrant. Käsemann notes that Paul’s prayer life in Rom 1:9–10a is not made parallel with the proclamation of the gospel. Ernst Käsemann, Commentary on Romans (trans. Geoffery W. Bromiley; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980), 18. While there is no parallel, prayer and the proclamation of the gospel are closely linked together. Sanday and Headlam, Epistle to the Romans, 20. Sanday and Headlam, Epistle to the Romans, 20. Moo, Epistle to the Romans, 104. The idea that all creation should acknowledge God and serve him is one that runs throughout the OT. Ps 119:91 asserts concerning God that, ^yd tL;pit.W hw"hy> tb;[]AT ~y[iv'r> xb;zme War>yyI / “Let all the earth fear the Lord; let all the inhabitants of the world stand in awe of him” (NRSV). 184. Paul will later assert concerning rebellious and sinful humanity that ouvk e;stin fo,boj qeou/ avpe,nanti tw/n ovfqalmw/n auvtw/n / “There is no fear of God before their eyes” (Rom 3:18).

NOTES

185.

186. 187. 188. 189. 190. 191.

192. 193. 194. 195. 196. 197. 198. 199.

200. 201. 202. 203.

204. 205. 206. 207. 208.

| 335

Since there is no fear of God, there cannot be true seba,zomai offered to God, since it denotes reverence, awe, and fear of God. ASV, ERV, ESV, KJV, NKJV, NASB, NET, NIV, NJB, RSV, NLT; NCV; AMP. Joseph Rotherham in his translation renders these words as “worship and service.” Joseph Bryant Rotherham, The Emphasised Bible: A New Translation (vol. 4; 1879; repr., Cincinnati: The Standard Publishing Company, 1916). J. B. Phillips, The New Testament in Modern English (London: Geoffrey Bles, 1960). Foerster, TDNT 7:173. Moo, Epistle to the Romans, 113n107. Byrne, Romans, 76. The Holy Bible: The Berkeley Version in Modern English (ed. Gerrit Verkuyl; Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1963). The Weymouth translation of Rom 1:25 also offers a better reading in rendering these words “divine honours and religious service.” This comes closer to the meaning of seba,zomai and latreu,w in the original text. Homer, Il. 6, 167. 417. Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 53.59. See also 2 Cor 7:1 (NET and NIV use the word “reverence” for fogbow). Moo, Epistle to the Romans, 204. Borchert, Worship in the New Testament, 87. Neyrey, Give God the Glory, 37 (italics in original). Neyrey, “Lost in Translation,” 3. Neyrey also adds here to the list as synonyms, “to extol” and “to acknowledge.” BDAG, 882. BDAG also notes here that the Persians practiced proskune,w in the presence of their deified king, and the Greeks performed proskune,w before a divinity or something considered holy. Thayer, New Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon, 548. BDAG, 882. BDAG, 882 (italics in original). Also see Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 53.56. Aeschylus, Pers. 499; Sophocles, Oed. col. 1654; Homer, Od. 4.522; 5.463; 13.354; Polybius, Hist. 10.17; Aristophanes, Plut. 771. See also comments by Greeven, TDNT 6:759. Herodotus, Hist. 2.121. Herodotus, Hist. 1.134.1. Xenophon, Cyr. 5.3.18. Greeven, TDNT 6:761. Josephus, Ant. 6.285; 7.187, 349, 354; 8.331; 11.331. The writer of LXX Esther while recognizing that proskune,w can be used of showing reverence or obeisance to an elevated human ruler such as Haman, in the narrative Mordecai refuses to perform the level of action of proskune,w to Haman (LXX Esther 3:2, 5; cf. 8:13 {E11} NRSV). The reason Mordecai refuses is because he does not want to set human glory above the glory of God. For Mordecai proskune,w is to be given to God alone. Hence in his prayer he asserts ouv proskunh,sw ouvde,na plh.n sou/ tou/ kuri,ou mou / “I will not bow down to anyone but you,

336

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

who are my Lord” (LXX Esther 4:17 {C5–7}). The “additions” in Esther correspond with that of the NRSV. 209. Philo, Ios. 164; Opif. 83. 210. Greeven, TDNT 6:763–65. Hurtado, How on Earth Did Jesus Become a God? 145–48 has broken down the number of times proskune,w appears elsewhere in the NT as follows: Matthew: 13 Mark: 2 Luke: 3 John: 10 Acts: 4 Hebrews: 2 Revelation: 24 211. BDAG, 882–83. 212. An example of proskune,w being applied to human beings is seen in Rev 3:9: ivdou. poih,sw auvtou.j i[na h[xousin kai. proskunh,sousin evnw,pion tw/n podw/n sou kai. gnw/sin o[ti evgw. hvga,phsa, se / “I will make them come and bow down before your feet, and they will learn that I have loved you” (NRSV). KJV and ASV have “worship before thy feet.” Here the risen Jesus promises that the opponents of the Christians of Philadelphia will come and bow down at their feet. The source for this saying in Rev 3:9 is based on the OT LXX passages of Isa 45:14 and 49:23 where proskune,w is also used of the Gentile enemies of Israel who will come and bow before them. Also see Gen 27:29 (LXX, MT) where Jacob is said to have the nations come and bow down before him. Isa 60:14 (MT) also refers to the enemies of Israel bowing down before them. While the language of the enemies bowing before their victims is derived from the OT, it seems that the readers would be familiar with the use of proskune,w when applied to humans and when applied to God. The book of Revelation jealously guards the worship of God (Rev 4:10; 11:1; 14:7; 15:4; 19:10; 22:3, 9) against any other form of worship which it views as idolatrous. Note the double prohibition against John from doing proskune,w to the revealing angel (Rev 19:10; 22:8). The question is not whether this is proskune,w in Rev 19:10; 22:8, because it would be the proskune,w of a human (John) as a level of action towards a heavenly being (the angel). The angel in this case refuses such a level of action as he sees himself as an equal with John and Christian believers and joins with them in the worship of God. See Stuckenbruck, Angel Veneration and Christology, 245–61. Note also the condemnation against those who do proskune,w to the hostile anti-Christian forces (Rev 13:8, 12, 15). 213. Greeven, TDNT 6:761–62. 214. The mention of unbelievers presupposes that in the Pauline worshipping communities unbelievers were also present. It is interesting that it is only in the Corinthian letters that Paul mentions a;pistoj, the unbeliever(s): 1 Cor 6:6; 7:12–15; 10:27; 14:22–24; 2 Cor 4:4; 6:14–15. The word a;pistoj also appears twice in the Pastoral Letters (1 Tim 5:8; Titus 1:15). 215. See Hurtado, How on Earth Did Jesus Become a God? 145–48 for a listing of proskune,w in the NT texts outside of Paul.

NOTES

| 337

216. On the charismatic nature of the Pauline worshipping community, see Dunn, Theology of Paul, 552–61; Bastian Van Elderen, “Glossalalia in the New Testament,” Bulletin of the Evangelical Theological Society 7.2 (Spring 1964): 53–58. 217. Morris, First Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians, 194. Fee, however, cautions against reading too much into Paul here. Fee asserts that there is no word in Paul’s Greek which means “worship service.” Gordon D. Fee, Listening to the Spirit in the Text (Grand Rapids; Cambridge, UK: Eerdmans, 2000), 91. While Fee is correct that there is no word in Paul for “worship service,” his reasoning is also somewhat pressed itself. While Paul may not have had a word that meant “worship service” in his vocabulary, it does not follow that the Pauline churches did not have a service of worship in communal gatherings. Paul seems to insinuate some type of order in the worship gatherings such as a hymn, a lesson, a revelation, a tongue, or an interpretation and that all these things should be done for the edification of the faith community (1 Cor 14:26). 218. Thiselton, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 1130. 219. See Lev 9:24; Num 14:5; 16:22, 45; 20:6; Judg 13:20; 1 Kgs 18:39; 1 Macc 4:55. For the same expression found elsewhere in the NT, see Matt 17:6; Rev 7:11; 11:16. See Fitzmyer, First Corinthians, 522. 220. Fitzmyer, First Corinthians, 522. 221. Garland, 1 Corinthians, 653. 222. Barrett, Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians, 326–27. 223. Thiselton, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 1130; Craig S. Keener, 1–2 Corinthians (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 115; Robertson and Plummer, First Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians, 319; Greeven, TDNT 6:765; W. Michaelis, TDNT 6:163. This phrase coupled with proskune,w also appears elsewhere in the NT in Matt 2:11; Rev 5:14; 19:4; 22:8. 224. Fee, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 687. 225. Robertson and Plummer, First Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians, 318. 226. See sec. 2.4. of chap. 2. 227. Humphrey, Grand Entrance. 228. Paul asserts that tongues is a sign to unbelievers whereas prophecy is a sign to believers (1 Cor 14:22). On 1 Cor 14:24, see Richard A. Horsley, 1 Corinthians (Abingdon New Testament Commentaries; Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1998), 185–86; Margaret E. Thrall, I  and  II Corinthians (Cambridge Bible Commentary; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1965), 99–100; Fee, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 685–87; Conzelmann, 1 Corinthians, 242–43; William F. Orr and James Arthur Walther, 1 Corinthians: A New Translation (AB 32; Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1976), 304–11. 229. Gingrich and Danker, Shorter Lexicon of the Greek New Testament, 142. 230. Barrett, Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians, 326–27. 231. Morris, First Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians, 194. 232. Ben Witherington, Conflict and Community in Corinth: A Social-Rhetorical Commentary on 1 and 2  Corinthians (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans; Carlisle: Paternoster, 1995), 285. Morris, First Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians, 193–94 seems to be of the same opinion that conversion is in view here.

338

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

233. Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 31.60. 234. Abraham J. Malherbe, The Letters to the Thessalonians (AB 32B; New York: Doubleday, 2000), 119. 235. Thiselton, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 1130 (italics mine). 236. In the narrative of Jonah 1:1–17, we see an example where polytheists acknowledge YHWH’s presence and call upon his name and offer sacrifices to him without necessarily converting to the religion of YHWH. When Jonah escapes into a ship and YHWH sends a storm, the mariners begin to cry out to their own gods (v. 5). When they discovered the storm was sent on account of Jonah, the mariners begin to cry out to YHWH (v. 14). When the storm subsuded, the mariners greatly feared YHWH and offered a sacrifice to YHWH and made vows to him (v. 16). The text does not explicitly state these mariners converted to the religion of YHWH. The NET notes on Jonah 1:16 comment: “Admittedly, the apparent ‘conversion’ of these Phoenician sailors to Yahwism is a surprising development. . . . [I]t is not altogether clear whether or not the sailors actually converted to faith in the Lord. They might have simply incorporated him into their polytheistic religion” (n71). Is it possible that we may have something similar in 1 Cor 14:24–25 where a pagan after being exposed of the internal secrets of his heart and convicted may have greatly feared God in the Christian community and exercised levels of actions of worship to him by acknowledging his presence and incorporated him into his polytheistic religion? 237. See sec. 8.1.2. of chap. 4. 238. On Paul’s use of the OT, see Steve Moyise, “Quotations,” in As It Is Written: Studying Paul’s Use of Scripture (ed. Stanley E. Porter and Christopher D. Stanley; Society of Biblical Literature Symposium Series; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2008), 15–28; Steve Moyise, The Old Testament in the New: An Introduction (London: Continuum, 2001), 75–97. 239. This has been noted in Orr and Walther, 1 Corinthians, 304. Orr and Walther also include Dan 2:47. See also Richard B. Hays, First Corinthians (Interpretation; Louisville: John Knox Press, 1997), 239; Fee, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 687; Garland, 1 Corinthians, 653; Barrett, Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians, 327. 240. On Isa 45:14, see Joseph Blenkinsopp, Isaiah 40–55: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AB 19A; New York: Doubleday, 2002), 256–58; Klaus Baltzer, Deutero-Isaiah: A Commentary on Isaiah 40–55 (trans. Margaret Kohl; ed. Peter Machinist; Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2001), 238–42; John N. Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 40–66 (NICOT; Grand Rapids; Cambridge, UK: Eerdmans, 1998), 211–15; Brevard S. Childs, Isaiah (Old Testament Library; Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2001), 354–55; Walter Brueggemann, Isaiah 40–66 (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1998), 80–82. 241. On Zech 8:23, see Carol L. Meyers and Eric M. Meyers, Haggai, Zechariah 1–8: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AB 25B; Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1987), 440–45; Eugene H. Merrill, Haggai Zechariah Malachi: An Exegetical Commentary (Chicago: Moody Press, 1994), 202–7; Janet E. Tollington, Tradition and Innovation

NOTES

242. 243. 244. 245.

246. 247. 248.

249. 250. 251. 252. 253. 254. 255. 256. 257.

258.

| 339

in Haggai and Zechariah 1–8 (Journal for the Study of the Old Testament: Supplement Series 150; Sheffield, UK: Sheffield Academic Press, 1993), 235–38, 240; Marvin A. Sweeney, The Twelve Prophets (ed. David W. Cotter; Berit Olam Studies in Hebrew Narrative and Poetry; Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2000), 2:654–56. Garland, 1 Corinthians, 653. Blenkinsopp, Isaiah 40–55, 258. See Figures 4 and 5 above. This theme taken from LXX Isa 45:14 is used in Rev 3:9: ivdou. poih,sw auvtou.j i[na h[xousin kai. proskunh,sousin evnw,pion tw/n podw/n sou kai. gnw/sin o[ti evgw. hvga,phsa, se / “I will make them come and bow down before your feet, and they will learn that I have loved you.” The KJV and ASV have “worship before thy feet.” Here the risen Jesus promises that the opponents of the Christians of Philadelphia will come and bow down at their feet. The source for this saying in Rev 3:9 is based on the OT LXX passages of Isa 45:14; 49:23 where proskune,w is also used of the Gentile enemies of Israel who will come and bow before them. Also see Gen 27:29 (LXX, MT) where Jacob is said to have the nations come and bow down before him. Isa 60:14 (MT) also refers to the enemies of Israel bowing down before them. Baltzer, Deutero-Isaiah, 238. Greeven, TDNT 6:761. Note the refrain “there is no other” in Isa 44:8; 45:5, 14, 18, 21–22; 46:9 cf. Isa 43:10–11. There is a co-relation between polytheism and idolatry, and the polemical texts of the OT against polytheism seem to address idolatry in the same category (Exod 20:23; 32:4; Deut 7:25; Isa 42:17; Jer 1:16). Meyers and Meyers, Haggai, Zechariah 1–8, 441. See Gingrich and Danker, Shorter Lexicon of the Greek New Testament, 169. Greeven, TDNT 6:763–65; Hurtado, How on Earth Did Jesus Become a God? 145–48. See chap. 3. I note here that Paul uses proskune,w only in reference to God and never to the risen Jesus. Gingrich and Danker, Shorter Lexicon of the Greek New Testament, 51. Louw-Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 87.79. BDAG, 259. Romans 6:6; 7:6, 28; 9:12; 12:11; 14:18; 16:18; Gal 4:8–9, 25; 5:13; Eph 6:7; Phil 2:22; Col 3:24; 1 Thess 1:9; 1 Tim 6:2; Titus 3:3. The most frequent occurrences of douleu,w is in Romans.On the formation of the Pauline corpus, see C. Leslie Mitton, The Formation of the Pauline Corpus of Letters (London: Epworth, 1955). BDAG, 259. They are listed as: 1. personal beings / humans 2. transcendant beings (God or Christ) 3. things (generally impersonal: sin, the law, desire)

259. In this metaphorical passage the bondage referred to may possibly be that of the Judaizers. See Matera, Galatians, 170. Matera refers to the Judaizers here as “the agitators.”

340

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

260. I noted already that Paul referred to the governmental authorities as God’s servant (Rom 13:4), and to oppose the governmental authorities amounted to opposing God himself who appointed them (Rom 13:2). See sec. 1.1. of chap. 3. 261. A similar idea is found in the Fourth Gospel where one who sins is described as a slave to sin: John 8:34, avpekri,qh auvtoi/j Îo`Ð VIhsou/j VAmh.n avmh.n le,gw u`mi/n o[ti pa/j o` poiw/n th.n a`marti,an dou/lo,j evstin Îth/j a`marti,ajР/ “Jesus answered them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, that everyone who commits sin is a slave [to sin].” See Marsh, Gospel of Saint John, 363. The contrast in John 8:34 is between slavery and freedom, a contrast also seen in Paul (Gal 4:21–31). 262. On the use of Paul’s descriptor of himself as a servant of Christ Jesus, see Michael Joseph Brown, “Paul’s Use of DOULOS CRISTOU IHSOU in Romans 1:1,” JBL 120/4 (2001): 723–37. 263. David J. MacLeod, “Eternal Son, Davidic Son, Messianic Son: An Exposition of Romans 1:1–7,” in Bibliotheca Sacra 162 (January-March 2005):78. While this is implicitly true in Paul, MacLeod seems to be unaware that Paul never calls himself a “servant of God” in his earlier letters. Paul speaks of being an apostle of both God and Jesus (Gal 1:1). An apostle as one who is sent implies a servant-master relationship where the servant acts as the envoy or messenger of the one who sends him. While Paul speaks of himself as a servant of Jesus Christ, he equally speaks of himself as “an apostle of Jesus Christ” (1 Cor 1:1; 2 Cor 1:1; cf. Eph 1:1; Col 1:1; 1 Tim 1:1; 2 Tim 1:1; Titus 1:1). The notion of the relational inferiority of an apostle to the one who sends him is seen in John 13:16: avmh.n avmh.n le,gw u`mi/n ouvk e;stin dou/loj mei,zwn tou/ kuri,ou auvtou/ ouvde. avpo,stoloj mei,zwn tou/ pe,myantoj auvto,n / “Truly, truly, I say to you, a servant is not greater than his master; nor is he who is sent greater than he who sent him” (NRSV). In this passage dou/loj and avpo,stoloj are used in apposition to each other so that they become synonymous. In the same way, tou/ kuri,ou and tou/ pe,myantoj are used in apposition and are synonymous. The servant is thus the sent one or apostle, and he is not greater than his master or lord who sent him. In this passage, Jesus indicates his servants/apostles are not greater than he who is the Lord who sends them. 264. Martin, Worship in the Early Church, 11–12. 265. The most common words for “servant” and / or “slave” in the LXX being dou/loj and pai/j. Both terms are used synonymously to express the Hebrew db,[, although pai/j also carries the meaning of a “young person” or a “child.” See Louw-Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 9.41. Such ascriptions were applied in the OT to Abraham (Gen 18:3), Moses (Exod 14:31; Num 12:7; Josh 14:7; Ps 105:26), David (2 Sam 7:5, 8, 19), yDI)b.[; dwIïd"l. / “David my servant” (Ps 89:3–4, 20–21; MT), Dauid tw/| dou,lw| mou / “David my servant” (Ps 88:4, 21; LXX), Elijah (2 Kgs 10:10), and the prophets (Jer 25:4; Dan 9:6, 10; Amos 3:7). In LXX Exod 14:31 and LXX Num 12:7, the word qera,pwn is used which is defined as, “a person who renders service—‘servant.’” See Louw-Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 35.20. 266. Ralph Martin notes that the bond of a slave or servant to a master in the biblical context, “was thought of and described in terms of privilege and honor more than of inhuman bondage.” Martin, Worship in the Early Church, 12.

NOTES

| 341

267. Compare this collective notion of the church as God’s servant with that of the nation of Israel which was collectively called by YHWH yDIßb.[; / “my servant” (Isa 43:10). 268. On the Haustafeln or household codes in the Pauline corpus, see M. Dibelius, An die Kolosser Epheser an Philemon (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1953), 43–50, 93–96; J. E. Crouch, The Origin and Intention of the Colossian Haustafel (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1972); D. L. Balch, “Household Codes,” in Greco-Roman Literature and the New Testament (ed. D. E. Aune; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1988), 25–50; D. C. Verner, The Household of God: The Social World of the Pastoral Epistles (Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1981); R. W. Gehring, House Church and Mission: The Importance of Household Structures in Early Christianity (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2004), 229–60; Ernest Best, “The Haustafel in Ephesians (Eph. 5:22–6:9),” Irish Biblical Studies 16.4 (1994): 146–60; Timothy G. Gombis, “A Radically New Humanity: The Function of Haustafel in Ephesians,” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 48.2 (2005): 317–30. 269. Colossians 4:1 says, Oi` ku,rioi to. di,kaion kai. th.n ivso,thta toi/j dou,loij pare,cesqe eivdo,tej o[ti kai. u`mei/j e;cete ku,rion evn ouvranw/| / “Masters, treat your slaves justly and fairly, for you know that you also have a Master in heaven” (NRSV). 270. Most scholars are of the consensus that 1  Thessalonians was the first letter written by Paul, dating from 50 CE to 51 CE and hence the earliest text in the NT. Brown, Introduction to the New Testament, 457 notes that 1 Thessalonians is “the oldest preserved Christian document,” and Malherbe calls it “the earliest extant letter of Paul’s.” Malherbe, Letters to the Thessalonians, 13. In the nineteenth century, some scholars questioned the authenticity of 1 Thessalonians, but the universal scholarly opinion today is that Paul wrote it. See Malherbe, Letters to the Thessalonians, 13. 271. Charles A. Wanamaker, The Epistle to the Thessalonians: A Commentary on the Greek Text (NIGTC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans; Carlisle: Paternoster, 1990), 84; Meeks and Fitzgerald, Writings of St. Paul, 5n9. 272. Malherbe, Letters to the Thessalonians, 118–19, 121. 273. See sec. 1.4. in chap. 1. 274. Paul also reminds the Corinthian Christians that they too prior to their conversion also served idols. 1 Cor 12:2, Oi;date o[ti o[te e;qnh h=te pro.j ta. ei;dwla ta. a;fwna w`j a"n h;gesqe avpago,menoi / “You know that when you were pagans, you were enticed and led astray to idols that could not speak” (NRSV). 275. The background to Paul’s description here of God is most likely derived from the OT, particularly Jer 10:10 (MT), ~yYIßx; ~yhiîl{a/-aWh) tm,êa/ ‘~yhil{a/ hw"Ühyw:) / “But the Lord is the true God; he is the living God,” a passage dealing with the context of YHWH’s supremacy and uniqueness over the futility of the idols which are described as both lifeless and false (Jer 10:1–16). Jer 10:10 does not appear in the LXX. This would indicate that Paul was alluding to the Hebrew text, unless there was a copy of the LXX that Paul had access to that is presently no longer extant. Malherbe agrees that the parallel is most likely to Jer 10:10. Malherbe, Letters to the Thessalonians, 121. E. Elizabeth Johnson on the other hand asserts, “There is not even any compelling reason to think the apostle himself consciously alludes to scripture when he speaks of God that way. It is simply one of the ways Jews refer to God.” E. Elizabeth Johnson, “Paul’s Reliance on Scripture in

342

276. 277. 278. 279.

280.

281. 282. 283. 284. 285.

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

1 Thessalonians” (paper presented at the Society of Biblical Literature, New Orleans, Louisiana, 2009): 3. Johnson’s judgment here may be a hasty one. How does she know with certainty that Paul is not alluding to Scripture here? While Jews spoke of God as the true and living God, where would they have obtained this phraseology from? It seems that such descriptive language for God would have been based on their religious texts such as the OT. Later in her conclusion, Johnson admits “that the Bible [OT] is the air Paul breathes, the water he swims in, his native language. Sometimes individual words or phrases can in fact signal that he relies on the Bible for much of his vocabulary” (20). Here Johnson has to acknowledge the Bible or OT as the source of Paul’s vocabulary. The two designations, the “true” and “living” God are used together only in Jer 10:10 and never appear as such in the rest of the OT. Fee, Pauline Christology, 39. For the “true God,” see 2 Chr 15:3 (15:1–19); Wis 12:24–27; 3 Macc. 6:16–21; 2 En. 66:2; Let. Aris. 1:139–40; Sib. Or. 5:493 (5:484–500). On the “living God,” see Deut 5:26; Josh 3:10; 1 Sam 17:26, 36; 2 Kgs 19:4, 16; Ps 42:2; 84:2; Isa 37:4, 17; Jer 23:36; Dan 6:20, 26; Hos 1:10; Jub. 1:25; 21:4; Ahiqar 1:1; Sib. Or. 3:763. BDAG, 587. See sec. 1.1 to 2.1. of chap. 4. Ernest Best, The First and Second Epistles to the Thessalonians (Black’s New Testament Commentaries; Peabody, MA: Hendrickson; London: Continium, 1986), 85. In a sense of irony, Paul seems to allude to the OT passage Jer 10:10 which deals with Israel’s apostasy from God to idols in contradistinction to his Gentile faith community in Thessalonica who have gone in the opposite direction, namely, from idols to God. Paul’s Gentile audience does what Israel should have done, they have turned to God and abandoned their idols. The verb evpistre,fw, which Paul uses to show the turning or conversion of the Thessalonians to God, is also used in the LXX to refer to Israel turning to God (LXX Hos 5:4; 6:1; Joel 2:13), and to Gentiles turning to God (LXX Ps 21:28; Isa 19:22; Jer 18:8, 11); it also used in Second Temple Jewish texts such as Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (T. Iss. 6:3; T. Dan 5:9, 11; T. Naph. 4:3). It is also used of God turning Jews and Gentiles to himself in T. Zeb. 9:7–8. See Malherbe, Letters to the Thessalonians, 119. Malherbe, Letters to the Thessalonians, 119. Luke uses it in Acts 14:16 and the idea is similar to 1 Thess 1:9 where a call is made to turn from their pagan ways to the living God who is the creator. Acts 14:15, u`ma/j avpo. tou,twn tw/n matai,wn evpistre,fein evpi. qeo.n zw/nta o]j evpoi,hsen to.n ouvrano.n kai. th.n gh/n kai. th.n qa,lassan kai. pa,nta ta. evn auvtoi/j / “that you should turn from these worthless things to the living God, who made the heaven and the earth and the sea and all that is in them” (NRSV). See Gingrich and Danker, Shorter Lexicon of the Greek New Testament, 169. Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 89.122. Frame, Epistles of St. Paul to the Thessalonians, 87. Frame, Epistles of St. Paul to the Thessalonians, 88. Malherbe, Letters to the Thessalonians, 119. Also see Richard, First and Second Thessalonians, 73; Charles Masson, Les deux épîtres de Saint Paul aux Thessaloniciens (Commentaire du Nouvea Testament XIa; Neuchatel; Paris: Delachaux and Niestlé S. A., 1957), 23.

NOTES

| 343

286. The theme of Gentiles turning from idols to worship YHWH as the true God is attested in some Second Temple Jewish texts. Two examples are Tob 14:6 and Jos. Asen. 11:10– 11. Tobit 14:6 says, kai. pa,nta ta. e;qnh evpistre,yousin avlhqinw/j fobei/sqai ku,rion to.n qeo.n kai. katoru,xousin ta. ei;dwla auvtw/n / “Then all the Gentiles will turn [“convert” NRSV] to fear [“worship” NRSV] the Lord God in truth, and will bury their idols” (RSV). The same verb used in Tob 14:6 (evpistre,fw) for turning is used by Paul in 1 Thess 1:9. In Tob 14:6, the Gentiles are seen as turning to God who is associated with truth, and they indicate this conversion by burying their idols. A similar view is seen in Jos. Asen. 11:10–11 (citation taken from Charlesworth, Old Testament Pseudepigrapha. Vol. 2, italics mine) 10But

I heard many saying That the God of the Hebrews is a true God, and a living God, and a merciful God, and compassionate and long-suffering and pitiful and gentle, and does not count the sin of a humble person, nor expose the lawless deeds of an afflicted person at the time of his affliction 11Therefore I will take courage too and turn to him, and take refuge with him, and confess all my sins to him, and pour out my supplication before him.

287. 288. 289. 290. 291.

This text describes the conversion of the Egyptian Aseneth to the Jewish religion of Joseph. What is noticeable are the similarities in language with 1 Thess 1:9. God is described as “a true God” and “a living God” to which Aseneth will “turn to.” This is the language of conversion. In Jos. Asen. 12:(6), Aseneth confesses, “before you I have sinned much in ignorance, and have worshipped dead and dumb idols.” In Jos. Asen. 10:12–13, Aseneth takes her numerous gods / idols of gold and silver and grinds them and threw others out the window. What is noticeable here is the transition from idols to God, which is also paralleled in 1 Thess 1:9. When God is designated as the “living God,” this reinforces God’s identity as creator. Sirach 18:1; 1 En. 5:1; 3 Macc. 6:28. See Malherbe, Letters to the Thessalonians, 120. Malherbe, Letters to the Thessalonians, 120; Masson, Les deux épîtres de Saint Paul aux Thessaloniciens, 23. Best, First and Second Epistles to the Thessalonians, 83 (bold lettering in original). Wanamaker, Epistle to the Thessalonians, 86. On the use of Paul’s vocabulary, see C. Umhau Wolf, “Concerning the Vocabulary of Paul,” JBL 67 (1948): 331–38. Brown, Introduction to the New Testament, 458. Brown also notes here that the city of Thessalonica was marked by a multiplicity of cults and that there were places where the Roman pantheon and the Roman emperor were worshipped including foreign Oriental deities such as Cabirus, Isis, Serapis and Osiris. Brown also makes mention that a temple of Caesar was built in Thessalonica and that ca. 27 BCE coins portrayed Julius Caesar as a god. Brown, Introduction to the New Testament, 458n6. Worship appears to have been an integral part of Thessalonian society.

344

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

292. K. H. Rengstorf, TDNT 2:267. See for example in LXX: Judg 2:7; 1 Sam 7:3–4; 12:20; Ps 99:2 (100:2; MT). 293. Malherbe, Letters to the Thessalonians, 120. 294. Morris, First and Second Epistles to the Thessalonians, 53n54. 295. The same is implied in Euripides, Bacch. 366, ࠗရɃǓ໵श໅ဝࣹඨ‫ࠗݰ‬ရ˳Ԇ཮ߥ˗‫ڗ‬࿰ड़͘࿰ࠗๆ‫ڗ‬ဎ  / “for we must serve Bacchus, the son of Zeus.” In Euripides, this service to Bacchus or Dionysus is described by the level of action of sacrifice and prayer. Euripides, Bacch. 44–45. 296. Reumann, Philippians, 463. 297. See LXX 1 Kgs 9:6, 9; 16:31; 22:54; 2 Kgs 21:3; 2 Chr 33:3; Jer 8:2; 13:10; 16:11; 22:9; and 25:6 where douleu,w and proskune,w are used together to describe the worship of other gods. Both words are also used of bowing to the Davidic king and serving him (Ps 71:11; 72:11 MT). There is a variant reading in the LXX of Dan 7:14 with that of Theodotion’s Greek version of Dan 7:14. LXX Dan 7:14 in speaking of the service by the nations to the one like a son of man uses the verb latreu,w, which is the verb usually associated with the worship of God or a god. Theodotion’s version uses the verb douleu,w instead. This indicates there may have been some overlap between latreu,w and douleu,w at least in Dan 7:14. 298. Wanamaker, Epistle to the Thessalonians, 84. 299. Paul is the major NT source for the use of the term parousia to refer to the future coming of Jesus. On Pauline use of parousia, see 1 Cor 15:23; 1 Thess 2:19; 3:13; 4:15; 5:23; cf. 2 Thess 2:1, 8–9. Paul uses the word avpoka,luyij / “revelation” (1 Cor 1:7 cf. 2 Thess 1:7) once in the same way as a synonym for parousi,a. In the Pastorals, parousi,a is never used. The Pastorals favor the word evpifa,neia / “appearance” to designate the coming of Jesus (1 Tim 6:14; 2 Tim 1:10; 4:1, 8; Titus 2:13). Outside the Pastorals, the noun evpifa,neia only apprears once in 2 Thess 2:8. The verb evpifai,nw / “appear” is found twice in the Pastorals in Titus 2:11, 3:4. See Hawthorne, Martin, and Reid, Dictionary of Paul and His Letters, 259. Another distinctive and dissimilar messianic feature which Paul held to, according to Witherington, was his belief in the two comings of the Messiah. As Witherington points out: “There is no evidence that early Jews were expecting two comings of Messiah; yet that is precisely what Paul believed, and it dictated how he viewed the future and the life of believers.” Ben Witherington, “Christology,” DPL, 112 (italics in original). The parousia assumes that the risen Jesus is alive and returning. The resurrection of Jesus thus stands as the medium between the death of Jesus and the parousia. Thus the parousia is also dependent on the resurrection of Jesus. 300. Morris, First and Second Epistles to the Thessalonians, 54. 301. Wanamaker, Epistle to the Thessalonians, 87. 302. Wanamaker, Epistle to the Thessalonians, 87. 303. If 1 Thess 1:9–10 represent material from Paul’s earliest letter, the resurrection and parousia appear to be already well established at a very early period. Thus already in Paul’s early stages of his literary activity, the resurrection and parousia are central and core points of Christian belief. See Vermes, Resurrection, 121.

NOTES

| 345

304. Wanamaker, Epistle to the Thessalonians, 87. Wanamaker further notes, “It also makes explicit the identification of the one coming from heaven with the man Jesus of Nazareth whom God had raised from the dead” (88). 305. Martin Hengel has also noted that when Paul does employ “Son of God” language, “it was kept for exceptional usage, at the climax of certain theological statements . . .. The confession ‘Son of God’ is primarily an explicit expression of Jesus’ exaltation.” Martin Hengel, The Son of God (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1976), 14, 66 (italics in original). 306. Dunn, Theology of Paul, 242. Dunn also maintains that what is reflected in the use of the Son of God title for Jesus in Rom 1:3–4 is “the impact of the resurrection of Jesus.” Dunn, Theology of Paul, 243. 307. Malherbe, Letters to the Thessalonians, 122. 308. Paul’s description of God as the one who raised Jesus from the dead is seen throughout his letters (Rom 10:9; 1 Cor 6:14; Gal 1:1; 1 Thess 1:10). The expression “the God who raised Jesus from the dead” is reminiscent of the OT formula “the God who brought you up out of the land of Egypt.” Otto Michel, Der Brief an die Römer (12th ed.; KEK; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1963), 127n3. In effect the God of the exodus for Paul, has become the God of the new exodus expressed in the language of resurrection, and deliverance from death. For Paul this was accomplished par excellence in the resurrection of Jesus. Paul does employ “exodus” language when he speaks of Jesus delivering or rescuing believers from sin and the wrath of God. In 1 Thess 1:10, VIhsou/n to.n r`uo,menon h`ma/j evk th/j ovrgh/j th/j evrcome,nhj / Jesus is the one who delivers/rescues from God’s wrath. The word r`uo,menon (from r`u,omai) “save, rescue, deliver,” Gingrich and Danker, Shorter Lexicon of the Greek New Testament, 177, is also used in the LXX in reference to the exodus out of Egypt in Exod 6:6: evxa,xw u`ma/j avpo. th/j dunastei,aj tw/n Aivgupti,wn kai. r`u,somai u`ma/j evk th/j doulei,aj / “I will free you from the burdens of the Egyptians and deliver you from slavery to them” (italics in original). Also note Col 1:13: o]j evrru,sato h`ma/j evk th/j evxousi,aj tou/ sko,touj kai. mete,sthsen eivj th.n basilei,an tou/ ui`ou/ th/j avga,phj auvtou/ / “He has rescued [delivered] us from the power of darkness and transferred us into the kingdom of his beloved Son” (NRSV). The phrase, “the God who raised Jesus from the dead” thus becomes an identity marker for the God whom the early Christians worshipped. Hans Küng remarks that the phrase “‘he who raised Jesus from the dead’ becomes practically the designation of the Christian God.” Hans Küng, On Being a Christian (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1976), 361. 309. F. B. Watson, “The Triune Divine Identity,” JSNT 80 (2000): 117. 310. Rengstorf, Die Auferstehung Jesu, 37. 311. Ramsey, Resurrection of Christ, 7. 312. Also, 2 Cor 1:9 says: tw/| qew/| tw/| evgei,ronti tou.j nekrou,j / “God who raises the dead.” Both Rom 4:17 and 2 Cor 1:9 speak of resurrection so that the giving of life to the dead is synonymous with the raising the dead. 313. Malherbe, Letters to the Thessalonians, 132. 314. For Paul the identity of the believer being “in Christ” also identifies the believer as a worshipper of God, for it is only “in Christ” that they are acceptable to God as redeemed people who are to render him service. Bird comments,“Christ is the sphere of holiness,

346

315.

316.

317. 318. 319. 320. 321. 322. 323. 324. 325. 326.

327. 328. 329. 330. 331. 332. 333. 334. 335. 336.

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

righteousness and redemption, and all those in Christ are emancipated from the old age of sin [cf. 2 Cor 5:17] and death, and are uniquely empowered by their baptism into Christ to live their lives in complete service of God.” Bird, Introducing Paul, 69. Romans 5:8 says: pollw/| ou=n ma/llon dikaiwqe,ntej nu/n evn tw/| ai[mati auvtou/ swqhso,meqa di auvtou/ avpo. th/j ovrgh/j / “Much more surely then, now that we have been justified by his [Jesus’] blood, will we be saved through him from the wrath of God” (NRSV). That Paul has the death of Jesus in mind is clear from the context of Rom 5:8–10. See Moo, Epistle to the Romans, 309–11. In Rom 1:18, VApokalu,ptetai ga.r ovrgh. qeou/ avp ouvranou/  / “For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven.” The indicative present passive verb denotes an on-going action. This is made clear in some translations like the NIV: “The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven”; NJB: “The retribution of God from heaven is being revealed.” Wanamaker, Epistle to the Thessalonians, 88 notes that the wrath of God “is currently being revealed.” On the wrath of God also, see comments of Morris, First and Second Epistles to the Thessalonians, 49–50. See Wanamaker, Epistle to the Thessalonians, 88. Elsewhere in the NT, qrhskei,a appears in Acts 26:5 and Jas 1:26–27 (2x). Douglas J. Moo, The Letter to the Colossians and Philemon (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans; Nottingham: APOLLOS, 2008), 224. BDAG, 459. Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 53.1. Surprisingly, Louw and Nida do not cite or address the use of qrhskei,a| in Col 2:18. Herodotus, Hist. 2.18. Herodotus, Hist. 2.37.1. Herodian, Hist. 4.8.17. J. B. Lightfoot, Saint Paul’s Epistles to the Colossians and Philemon (new ed.; London: Macmillan, 1879), 196 (italics mine). Marvin R. Vincent, Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament (4 vols.; New York: C. Scribner’s Sons, 1887–1900; repr., Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1990). Also at http:// vws.biblecommenter.com/colossians/2.htm (accessed 21 December 2010). Thayer, New Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon, 292 (italics in original). Schmidt, TDNT 3:156–57. See also Lightfoot, Saint Paul’s Epistles to the Colossians and Philemon, 196. See sec. 1.2. in chap. 3. See sec. 1.2.2. in chap. 3. Schmidt, TDNT 3:157–58. BDAG, 459. Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 53.1. See Schmidt, TDNT 3:156. Stuckenbruck, Angel Veneration and Christology, 111. Most scholars have speculated that the proponents of this “error” were a Jewish group or perhaps several Jewish groups. If the Colossian opponents were Jewish, it was a “very syncretistic form of Judaism, unlike anything we know of.” James D.  G. Dunn, The

NOTES

337. 338.

339. 340.

341. 342. 343.

344. 345.

346.

347. 348.

349.

350.

| 347

Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon: A Commentary on the Greek Text (NIGTC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996), 180. See the helpful bibliographical information supplied in Stuckenbruck, Angel Veneration and Christology, 111n161. Others have postulated the idea that the opponents in Colossians are adherents of a mystery cult (although most scholars highly doubt this due to dating considerations), Pythagorean idea, or Bacchic practices. See Stuckenbruck, Angel Veneration and Christology, 114. These theories still remain debatable. Stuckenbruck, Angel Veneration and Christology, 111. Margaret Y MacDonald, Colossians and Ephesians (ed. Daniel  J. Harrington; SP  17. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2000), 112. MacDonald notes here that the difficulty in this phrase has been due to “ambiguity introduced by the Greek text.” MacDonald, Colossians and Ephesians, 113. Schmidt, TDNT 3:156. Schmidt’s argument appears compelling as he cites the contrasting phrase ۟‫ۭٗݰ‬໵͘໅Ǔࠗမဎ˗ǓԆࢆ‫ڗ‬ဎ໅ङဎ / “worship of demons” in Eusebius, Hist. eccl., 6. 41.2. See Schmidt, TDNT 3:157. Schmidt, TDNT 3:157. Schmidt argues, however, that the writer in Col 2:18 is assailing the worship of angels. Clinton E. Arnold, The Colossian Syncretism: The Interface between Christianity and Folk Belief at Colossae (WUNT 2/77; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1995), 8–102. MacDonald, Colossians and Ephesians, 112; Dunn, Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon, 179. Moo, Letter to the Colossians and Philemon, 227 comments that the traditional interpretation of qrhskei,a| tw/n avgge,lwn as an objective genitive should be preferred. Dunn, Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon, 179. Dunn, Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon, 179. Dunn, however, notes here that second-century sources do describe or accuse Jews of worshipping angels. Clement of Alexandria, Origen, and Celsus made these accusations against the Jews. However, Dun cautions here as well, “none of these can be described as a friendly witness.” These second-century sources are removed from the period under consideration in this study. Apoc Zeph 6:5; Apoc Ab. 17:2; Philo, Fug. 212; Philo, Somn. 1.232, 238. Interestingly, in the Life of Adam and Eve, the angels are commanded to worship Adam as image of God. L.A.E. 13–15. On this theme, see the comments in D. Steenburg, “The Worship of Adam and Christ as the Image of God,” JSNT 39 (1990): 95–109. Stuckenbruck, Angel Veneration and Christology, 112–13; Donald Guthrie, New Testament Introduction (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1970), 548. Wesley Carr, Angels and Principalities (Society for New Testament Studies Monograph Series 42; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981), 70. Wesley Carr, “Two Notes on Colossians,” Journal of Theological Studies 34 (1973): 500. Stuckenbruck, Angel Veneration and Christology, 116–17; MacDonald, Colossians and Ephesians, 112; Bruce, Epistle to the Colossians, to Philemon, and to the Ephesians, 25–26, 118–19. If the subjective genitive is meant, then it would reflect certain OT texts which command the angels in imperatives to render worship to God such as LXX Ps 102:20 (103:20 MT): euvlogei/te to.n ku,rion pa,ntej oi` a;ggeloi / “Bless the Lord all you angels”; LXX Ps 148:2,

348

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

aivnei/te auvto,n pa,ntej oi` a;ggeloi / “Praise ye him, all his angels.” Human visionaries are also privy as witnesses to the heavenly beings worshipping God as in the “trisagion” of Isa 6:3 (cf. Rev 4:8). Tuschling, Angels and Orthodoxy, 108, 131 comments, “The cherubim and seraphim exemplify correct worship of God . . . the fact that these divine beings worship God underscores their subordinate status . . .. God as the recipient of worship is glorified and the kingly aspect of his nature is stressed.” While Tuschling is correct in his analysis here, another critical point is that the worship of God by the cherubim and seraphim also reinforce another important disjunctive category, that of creator and creature, a category Paul vehemently argued for in Rom 1:18–25 as I examined above. Richard Bauckham correctly notes in light of this point that “it was worship which signaled the distinction between God and every creature, however exalted. God must be worshipped; no creature may be worshipped.” Bauckham, “Worship of Jesus in Philippians 2:9–11,” in Martin and Dodd, Where Christology Began, 129. Tuschling, Angels and Orthodoxy, 207 summarizes the relationship between God and angels, Angels, subordinate divine beings who serve God, are potentially ambivalent. By developing angelology in the direction of liturgical praise of God, monotheism is safeguarded, as we have seen. God’s majesty is even enhanced by surrounding him with beings who, though dazzling, are far beneath him in glory and who worship him. The ancient concept of the heavenly court is “liturgicized”; heaven is viewed as a temple and angels as priests.

351. 352. 353. 354.

355.

While in this scenario heaven is viewed as a temple and the angels as priests, Paul sees Christian believers in analogous terms. Paul sees the Christian believer as the temple of God both collectively (1 Cor 3:16–17; Eph 2:21–22) and individually (1 Cor 6:19–20), and he views believers as priests in their capacity of offering up their bodies as “living sacrifices” (Rom 12:1) and as offering their very selves (Rom 6:13). The view of Christian believers as priests or a priesthood is also attested elsewhere in the NT (1 Pet 2:9; Rev 1:5). Humphrey, Grand Entrance. Jerry L. Sumney, Colossians: A Commentary (New Testament Library; Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2008), 11. Stuckenbruck, Angel Veneration and Christology, 117 thinks that these alternatives in interpretation are “misleading.” Fred O. Francis, “Humility and Angel Worship in Col. 2:18.” Studia Theologica 16 (1963): 109–34. Francis’s article was also reprinted in Conflict at Collosae (ed. Fred O. Francis and Wayne A. Meeks; Missoula, MT: Society of Biblical Literature / Scholars Press, 1975). Hurtado, Lord Jesus Christ, 509n53 concurs with Francis: “I remain persuaded that the ‘worship of angels’ phrase here [Col 2:18] refers to what the author regards as a distracting speculative interest in participation in the worship that angels perform.” This view, while not universally subscribed to in scholarship, has nevertheless gained considerable support. See Stuckenbruck, Angel Veneration and Christology, 116. Also see comments made by Dunn, Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon, 28, 76, 180–85, 195 who sees

NOTES

356.

357.

358. 359.

360.

361.

362. 363. 364. 365. 366. 367. 368. 369. 370.

| 349

Col 2:18 as indicating participatory worship with the angels. Dunn cites the examples from Qumran as well where the community believed they were emulating the worship of the angels in heaven. In 4Q400–7, the men of the community enter into the worship of the the angels that is offered to God. In this respect the human worshipping joins with the heavenly worshipping community (the angels) in worshipping God together. Geza Vermes, The Dead Sea Scrolls in English (London: Penguin Books, 1968), 42. Vermes comments here, “According to the Bible, the first duty of the heavenly beings—the Seraphim of Isaiah, the Cherubim of Ezekiel, and the angels of Psalm 148—is the praise and worship of God; and so it was for the followers of the Teacher of Righteousness. They were to join their voices to those of the Angels of the Presence raised in prayer and blessing in the celestial Temple.” Moo, Letter to the Colossians and Philemon, 227. As seen particularly in the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice. See Geza Vermes, The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls in English (New York: Penguin Books, 1997), 321–30. Even though the angels are spoken of in lofty terms, Tuschling, Angels and Orthodoxy, 87 notes that full divinity is not intended for angels. God is depicted as highly exalted above the heavenly beings. Stuckenbruck, Angel Veneration and Christology, 157–64 likewise shows that the venerative language used of angels in the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice is qualified by their exemplary worship of God. Alan F. Segal, “The Risen Christ and the Angelic Mediator Figures in Light of Qumran,” in Jesus and the Dead Sea Scrolls (ed. James H. Charlesworth, Anchor Bible Reference Library; New York: Doubleday, 1992), 307. MacDonald, Colossians and Ephesians, 113. Examples are seen in 4 Macc. 5:7 where it speaks of “the worship of the Jews” with God as the intended object. Josephus, Ant. 12.5.4. also uses the same expression to speak of the worship of the Jews. Arnold, Colossian Syncretism, 91. LXX Ps 96:7; Ps 103:20; 148:2; Isa 6:1–8; Dan 7:10. Stuckenbruck, Angel Veneration and Christology, 119. Stuckenbruck, Angel Veneration and Christology, 119. Stuckenbruck, Angel Veneration and Christology, 111–19. Tuschling, Angels and Orthodoxy, 55. Tuschling, Angels and Orthodoxy, 55–56. Tuschling, Angels and Orthodoxy, 55. N. T. Wright, The Epistles of Paul to the Colossians and to Philemon: An Introduction and Commentary (Tyndlae New Testaent Commentaries; Leicester, UK: Inter-Varsity Press; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans; 1986), 122. Wright notes here, however, that the Jews of Paul’s day would have “rejected this charge indignantly.” Wright makes the claim that the over-interest in angels among this alleged Jewish group in Colossae was perhaps based on the view that the law was given through the agency of angels. The difficulty with this is that it is wholly presumptive on Wright’s part and not attested in the text of Colossians. Colossians says nothing about the law being given through angels. Paul mentions the

350

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

idea that the law was given through angels in Gal 3:19 (cf. Acts 7:53). On Gal 3:19, see Tolmie, “Angels as Arguments?” 4–6. 371. Tolmie, “Angels as Arguments?” 18–19 comments, If we turn our attention to the rhetorical function of angels in Paul’s arguments, it should be noted at the outset that the references to angels are never used as a main argument in any section of these letters. Rather, angels are mentioned relatively seldom, and when they are, in fact, alluded to, one does not find any extensive discussion of them or any detailed argumentation based on them. Instead, they are merely mentioned briefly; in some instances the references might even appear incidental . . . Does Paul use angels as arguments? The answer: Only rarely; but, when he does, he does so in a variety of ways, which in some cases, are very complex . . . .Paul might thus be accused of making too little of angels. 372. Donald Guthrue, who assumes Pauline authorship for Colossians, notes that in Colossians “[i]t is clear enough that the false teaching was in some way detracting from the Person of Christ, for Paul lays great stress upon His pre-eminence” (i.15–19).” Guthrie, New Testament Introduction, 546. 373. Colossians 2:23 says, a[tina, evstin lo,gon me.n e;conta sofi,aj evn evqeloqrhski,a| kai. tapeinofrosu,nh| Îkai.Ð avfeidi,a| sw,matoj ouvk evn timh/| tini pro.j plhsmonh.n th/j sarko,j  / “These have indeed an appearance of wisdom in promoting self-made religion and asceticism and severity to the body, but they are of no value in stopping the indulgence of the flesh” (ESV). 374. Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 53.12; Thayer, New Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon, 168. 375. Schmidt, TDNT 3:159. 376. MacDonald, Colossians and Ephesians, 117 (italics mine). 377. Other scholars who see a connection between Col 2:23 and Col 2:18 are Marianne Meye Thompson, Colossians and Philemon (Two Horizons New Testament Commentary; Grand Rapids; Cambridge, UK: Eerdmans, 2005), 65; and Ian K. Smith, Heavenly Perspective: A Study of the Apostle Paul’s Response to a Jewish Mystical Movement (London; New York: T&T Clark, 2006), 140. Smith in this case sees the act of evqeloqrhski,a in Col 2:23 as the “activity of people” in worship whereas in Col 2:18 it is the “activity of angels” in worship. Smith agrees with Francis that a subjective genitive is implied in the reference to the worship of angels so that it means participatory worship with angels. He nevertheless sees a connection in the terminology in 2:23 and 2:18; see also Kümmel, Introduction to the New Testament, 339; William Barclay, The Letters to Philippians, Colossians and Thessalonians (2nd ed.; Daily Study Bible; Edinburgh: Saint Andrew Press, 1960), 175–76; A.  T. Robertson, Word Pictures of the New Testament on Col 2:23, at http://www.studylight.org/com/rwp/view.cgi?book=col&chapter= 002&verse=023 (accessed 11 October 2010); F.  F. Bruce, “The Colossian Heresy,” Bibliotheca Sacra 141 (1984):196–97; Lightfoot, Saint Paul’s Epistles to the Colossians and Philemon, 206; Alford, New Testament for English Readers, 462.

NOTES

| 351

378. Robert McLachlan Wilson, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Colossians and Philemon (ICC; London; New York: T&T Clark, 2005), 230. 379. Maurice A. Hofer, “The Epistle to the Colossians,” in A Commentary on the New Testament (Washington, DC: Catholic Biblical Association, 1942), 527 argues that this is “a cult paid not to good, but to fallen angels . . . evil spirits.” See also Smith, Heavenly Perspective, 142. 380. Tolmie, “Angels as Arguments?” 18 notes, In general, it is evident that Paul believed in the existence of angels—good and evil. If my analysis is correct, most of the references are to good angels (Gal. 1:8; 3:19; 4:14; 1 Cor. 11:10; 13:1; 2 Cor. 11:14), with evil angels only referred to or implied in four instances (1 Cor. 4:9; 6:3; 2 Cor. 12:7; Rom. 8:38). Of all the instances included in this classification, the interpretations of the references to angels in 1 Cor. 4:9 and 11:10 are the most uncertain. 381. Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 37.52 point out that the terms qro,noi, kurio,thtej, avrcai,, and evxousi,ai in Col 1:16 are “are understood as being supernatural cosmic powers, whether angelic or demonic . . . but it is possible that these should be understood in terms of human rulers.” The issue here is ambiguity in these terms. Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 12.44 admit that, “it is difficult, if not impossible, to determine what are the significant differences between these supernatural powers and forces.” 382. Donald Guthrie, “Colossians,” in Guthrie, Motyer, Stibbs, and Wiseman, New Bible Commentary Revised, 1148. 383. Guthrie, “Colossians,” 1144. 384. Karl Barth, Dogmatics in Outline (London: SCM Press, 1949), 36. 385. Fitzmyer, “A Feature of Qumran Angelology and the Angels of I Cor. xi. 10,” 48–58. While angels can be respected and honored even with the highest status attributed to an angel such as God’s principal angel, they are never on par with God. Angels no matter how high are still servants of God and subservient to him. The principal angel in rabbinic Judaism is Metatron, a name which is believed to be adapted from the Greek word metathronos, meaning “one who stands after or behind the throne.” If this is the case, then according to Segal it represents a softening by the rabbis of the more usual Hellenisitc term synthronos, meaning “one with the throne,” which would imply a sharing of the throne with God. The word synthronos implies equality, while metathronos would imply inferiority. Segal notes that this shift in prepositions by the rabbis would “reduce the heretical implications of calling God’s principal angel his synthronos.” Segal, “Risen Christ and the Angelic Mediator Figures in Light of Qumran,” 310–11. Also see S. Lieberman, “Metatron, The Meaning of His Name and His Functions” (appendix), in Ithamar Gruenwald, Apocalyptic and Merkabah Mysticism (Arbeiten zur Geschichte des antiken Judentums und des Urchristentums 14; Leiden: Brill, 1980), 235–41. It is on this particular point that Hurtado’s (pace) position that the origin of NT Christology is rooted in the Second Temple Jewish concept of the principal angel as mediator or intermediary must be rejected. Any principal angel no matter how high was never conceived of as God’s equal on the throne. Sirach 45:2 speaks of Moses as w`moi,wsen auvto.n do,xh| a`gi,wn / “he

352

386. 387. 388. 389.

390. 391. 392. 393. 394.

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

[God] made him similar in glory to the holy ones” (author’s translation). While Moses is said to be similar (o`moio,w) to the holy ones or angels, he is not said to be equal to them. Both the NRSV and RSV mistranslate Sir 45:2 as “He made him equal in glory to the holy ones.” The word o`moio,w does not mean “equal” but rather “to be like or similar to something else—‘to be like, to resemble, to be similar to.’” Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 64.4. The KJV (Apocrypha) provides a better translation of Sir 45:2, “He made him like to the glorious saints [or holy ones].” The risen Jesus, according to Paul, is spoken of as sharing in the divine identity (not participating), and said to be co-creator with God (1 Cor 8:6; Col 1:16). Paul can also speak of the preexistent Jesus as sharing “equality with God” (Phil 2:6) as does the Fourth Gospel (John 5:18, 23). This is a striking point of dissimilarity with the angelology of Second Temple Judaism. Borchert, Worship in the New Testament, 87. Neyrey, “Lost in Translation,” 3. Neyrey, Give God the Glory, 37. Dunn comments, “In no case in the New Testament is there talk of offering cultic worship (latreuein) to Jesus.” James D. G. Dunn, Did the First Christians Worship Jesus? The New Testament Evidence (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2010), 13. However, in Acts 13:2 there may be a case where leitourge,w is used of “the Lord” who may be the risen Jesus. The text is variously translated “worshiping the Lord” (NAB, ESV, NIV, NLT, RSV, NRSV); “ministered to the Lord” (KJV, NKJV). Hurtado, At the Origins of Christian Worship, 66 notes that the verb leitourge,w refers to “cultic/worship activity.” See also Bauckham, “Jesus, Worship of” ABD 3:813 who agrees that this verb refers to the “cultic service of God.” See BDAG, 882–83. BDAG, 882. This is the case with proskune,w only in Paul (1 Cor 14:25) but not the rest of the NT, which distributes the word to referents other than God. See sec. 1.1.2. and 5.1.1. in chap. 4. In the NT, idolatry is only mentioned in Paul, 1 Pet 4:3, and Rev 21:8; 22:15. On idolatry, see F. Büchsel, TDNT 2:380. For further works on idolatry, see Richard Liong-Seng Phua, Idolatry and Authority: A Study of 1 Corinthians 8.1–11.1 in Light of the Jewish Diaspora (London; New York: T&T Clark, 2005); Paul J. Achtemeier, “Gods Made with Hands: The New Testament and the Problem of Idolatry.” Ex Auditu 15 (1999): 43–61; Stephen C. Barton, ed., Idolatry: False Worship in the Bible, Early Judaism and Christianity (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2007); G. K. Beale, “Isaiah VI 9–13: A Retributive Taunt against Idolatry,” Vetus Testamentum 41 (1991): 257–78; Edward M. Curtis, “Idol, Idolatry,” in ABD 3:376–81; Knut Holter, Second Isaiah’s Idol-Fabrication Passages (Beiträge zur biblischen Exegese und Theologie 28; Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 1993; Thorkild Jacobsen, “The Graven Image,” in Ancient Israelite Religion (ed. Patrick D. Miller, Paul D. Hanson, and S. Dean McBride; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1987), 15–32; C. J. Labuschagne, The Incomparability of Yahweh in the Old Testament (Pretoria Oriental Series 5; Leiden: Brill, 1966); E. P. Meadors, Idolatry and the Hardening of the Heart (New York: T&T Clark, 2006); Wayne A. Meeks, “‘And Rose Up to Play’: Midrash and Paranesis in 1 Cor.

NOTES

395.

396. 397. 398. 399.

400. 401.

402. 403. 404.

405. 406.

407.

| 353

10:1–22,” JSNT 16 (1982): 64–78; C.  R. North, “The Essence of Idolatry,” in Von Ugarit nach Qumran (ed. Otto Eissfeldt; Berlin: A. Töpelmann, 1958), 151–60; Brian S. Rosner, “Temple Prostitution in 1 Corinthians 6:12–20,” Novum Testamentum 40 (1998): 336–51; and Karl-Gustav Sandelin, “The Jesus-Tradition and Idolatry,” NTS 42 (1996): 412–20; and Herbert Schlossberg, Idols of Destruction (Nashville: Nelson, 1983). Also see the extensive bibliography supplied in S. F. Eix, “Bibliography,” Ex Auditu 15 (1999): 143–50 and the helpful bibliography found in P.  W. Comfort, “Idolatry,” DPL, 426. Büchsel calls for caution here. The noun eivdwlolatri,a is not a compound word, according to Büchsel, made up of the words eivdwlon and latrei,a. Büchsel, TDNT 2:379. Büchsel comments here that “eivdwlolatri,a, which in terms of the derivation is more correct than eivdwlolatrei,a, and eivdwlolatrei/n come from the subst[antive] eivdwlola,trhj as gewmetri,a and gewmetrei/n come from gewme,trhj. eivdwlolatri,a is not, therefore, a compound of eivdwlon and latrei,a.” Léon-Dufour lapses into this very parsing error when he states that eivdwlolatri,a comes from ei;dwlon and latrei,a. Léon-Dufour, Dictionary of the New Testament, 236. BDAG, 280. Comfort, “Idolatry,” DPL, 424. See also Brian S. Rosner, “The Concept of “Idolatry,” Themelios 24.3 (May 1999): 21–30. In Col 3:5, idolatry is equated with the vice of greed. Büchsel, TDNT 2:379. Büchsel states that “ड़Ǔࠗ‫͘ݰ‬໅Ǔ characterises the Jews.” While this may be true to a certain extent, Paul also indicts Israel with committing idolatry as well (cf. Ezek 22:1–16). Paul sees Jews as equally deserving as Gentiles of God’s judgment against sin (Rom 1–2). Masson, Les deux épîtres de Saint Paul aux Thessaloniciens, 23n4 (italics in original). In rabbinic literature, idolatry is referred to as ~ylIylIa/ td;b{[} the worship of “worthless idols” or “vain things.” See BDB, 47; Hebrew-English Lexicon (New York: Harper and Brothers, n.d,), 17. While the LXX employs the same word ei;dwlon that Paul uses, one of the Hebrew words for idol is lylia,/ which is used in the MT and does carry the meaning of “insignificant, worthless . . . always contemptuously as nonentities, idols.” Holladay, Concise Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament, 17. Barrett, Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians, 237. Phua, Idolatry and Authority, 34. John D. Witvliet, “Isaiah in Christian Liturgy,” in Touching the Altar: The Old Testament for Christian Worship (ed. Carol M. Bechtel; Grand Rapids; Cambridge, UK: Eerdmans, 2008), 69. Comfort, “Idolatry,” DPL, 425. The description of Paul given in Acts 17:16 seems to express his disdain for idols as well. Luke reports that as Paul was in Athens: to. pneu/ma auvtou/ evn auvtw/| qewrou/ntoj katei,dwlon ou=san th.n po,lin / “his spirit was provoked within him as he saw that the city was full of idols” (RSV). Beale, We Become What We Worship, 203. It is very unfortunate that in Beale’s book he does not engage the various Hebrew and Greek words related to idolatry. In his

354

408. 409. 410.

411.

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

introductory section on what idolatry is (17–20), while he defines idolatry he does not supply the biblical Hebrew or Greek words on idolatry. Also see Comfort, “Idolatry,” DPL, 426. Paul would be in full agreement with the writer of Wis 14:27, “for the worship of idols not to be named is the beginning and cause and end of all evil.” Beale, We Become What We Worship, 216. Beale, We Become What We Worship, 230. Also see Barrett, Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians, 237; Charles Hodge, Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1965), 194–95. An example can be seen in Ps 115:2–8, 2

Why should the nations say, “Where is their God?” 3 Our God is in the heavens; he does whatever he pleases. 4 Their idols are silver and gold, the work of human hands. 5 They have mouths, but do not speak; eyes, but do not see. 6 They have ears, but do not hear; noses, but do not smell. 7 They have hands, but do not feel; feet, but do not walk; they make no sound in their throats. 8 Those who make them are like them; so are all who trust in them. (NRSV; italics mine)

412.

413. 414.

415. 416. 417. 418.

Also see Ps 135:15–18, which contains similar language. The section in Isa 40–55 also addresses the folly of idolatry and the supremacy of YHWH over the idols and gods of the nations. Ephesians 4:24 says, kai. evndu,sasqai to.n kaino.n a;nqrwpon to.n kata. qeo.n ktisqe,nta evn dikaiosu,nh| kai. o`sio,thti th/j avlhqei,a / “and to clothe yourselves with the new self, created according to the likeness of God in true righteousness and holiness” (NRSV). Colossians 3:10 says, kai. evndusa,menoi to.n ne,on to.n avnakainou,menon eivj evpi,gnwsin kat eivko,na tou/ kti,santoj auvto,n / “and have clothed yourselves with the new self, which is being renewed in knowledge according to the image of its creator” (NRSV). The noun eivkw,n appears in LXX Gen 1:26. This connection is also made in Rev 9:20 where the worship of demons is associated with the worship of idols of gold, silver, bronze, stone, and wood. See Mounce, Book of Revelation, 197–98; Beale, We Become What We Worship, 264–67; Gregory W. Dawes, “The Danger of Idolatry: First Corinthians 8:7–13,” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 58.1 (1996): 82–98. See sec. 2.1.2. of chap. 4. Dunn, Theology of Paul, 544; Lust, Eynikel, and Hauspie, Greek-English Lexicon of the Septuagint, no. 4358. Graham Twelftree, Christ Triumphant: Exorcism Then and Now (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1985), 90. On meat or food offered to idols, see Joop Smit, “About the Idol Offerings”: Rhetoric, Social Context, and Theology of Paul’s Discourse in First Corinthians 8:1–11:1 (Contributions to Biblical Exegesis and Theology 27; Leuven, Belgium: Peeters, 2000); Alex T. Cheung, Idol Food in Corinth: Jewish Background and Pauline Legacy (JSNTSup 176; Sheffield, UK: Sheffield Academic Press, 1999); Peter David Gooch, Dangerous Food:1 Corinthians 8–10 in its Context (Studies in Christianity and Judaism 5;

NOTES

419. 420. 421. 422. 423.

424. 425. 426.

| 355

Waterloo, Ontario: Wilfrid Laurier University Press, 1993); David E. Garland, “The Dispute over Food Sacrificed to Idols (1 Cor 8:1–11:1),” Perspectives in Religious Studies 30.2 (2003): 173–97; Gordon D. Fee, “Eivdwlo,quta Once Again: An Interpretation of 1 Corinthians 8–10,” Biblica 61 (1980): 181–87; Moses Taiwo, Paul’s Rhetoric in 1 Corinthians 10:29b-30 (Saarbrücken: Müller, 2008); Bruce N. Fisk, “Eating Meat Offered to Idols: Corinthian Behavior and Pauline Response in 1 Corinthians 8–10 (A Response to Gordon Fee),” Trinity Journal 10.1 (1989): 47–70; John Fotopoulos, Food Offered to Idols in Roman Corinth: A Social-Rhetorical Reconsideration of 1 Corinthians 8:1–11 (WUNT 2/151; Tübingen; Mohr Siebeck, 2003); David W.  J. Gill, “The Meat-Market at Corinth (1 Corinthians 10:25),” Tyndale Bulletin 43.2 (1992): 389–93; Derek Newton, “Food Offered to Idols in 1 Corinthians 8–10,” Tyndale Bulletin 49.1 (1998): 179–82; Fergus J. King, “Eating in Corinth: Full Meal or Token?” Irish Biblical Studies 19.4 (1997): 161–73. On the various shrines and temples of various gods in Corinth, see Phua, Idolatry and Authority, 148–49. J. Murphy-O’Connor, St. Paul’s Corinth: Texts and Archaeology (Collegeville, MN: Glazier, 1983), 33. Fee, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 359. Comfort, “Idolatry,” 425; Phua, Idolatry and Authority, 148–49. The Hebrew lylia/ etymologically implies the nonexistent nature of the idol, rather than its Greek equivalent ei;dwlon. The Hebrew understanding of this word perhaps lies behind Paul’s view of the idols as having no real existence in the world. See Fee, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 363, 473, 475–76. Conzelmann states that behind the gods/idols there “lurks” demons. Conzelmann, 1 Corinthians, 173. Twelftree, Christ Triumphant, 91. Metzger, Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, 494 states concerning this variant, The words ta. e;qnh, though attested by î46vid a A C P Y 33 81 1739 al, were considered to be an ancient gloss, introduced lest the reader assume that the subject of qu,ousin (bis) is VIsrah.l kata. sa,rka (ver. 18). The presence of ta. e;qnh prompted a subsequent modification in the substitution of . . . qu,ei . . . qu,ei (K 88 326 614 Byz Lect), introduced by grammatically-minded scribes to accord with a neuter plural subject. In the interest of greater clarity, the words kai. ouv qew|/ were transposed in several witnesses (D F Ggr) to follow the second qu,ousin.

427. See sec. 1.2.2. of chap. 3. 428. A similar imperative is issued in 1 John 5:21, Tekni,a fula,xate e`auta. avpo. tw/n eivdw,lwn / “Little children, keep yourselves from idols.” 429. For a detailed study on 1 Cor 10:1–12 and the relationship of the history of Israel on idolatry to that of the Corinthian believers, see the discussion in Richard B. Hays, Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989), 93–94; Thiselton, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 774–75, 778; David E. Garland, 1 Corinthians (Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament; Grand Rapids: Baker Academic,

356

430. 431. 432. 433. 434.

435. 436. 437. 438. 439. 440.

441. 442. 443. 444. 445. 446. 447. 448.

449. 450.

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

2003), 480; F. F. Bruce, 1 and 2 Corinthians (New Century Bible; London: Marshall, Morgan and Scott, 1971), 90–94. Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 5.15. See 4 Macc. 5:2 for the first appearance of eivdwlo,qutoj. Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 5.15. Conzelmann, 1 Corinthians, 173. Aune, “Worship, Early Christian,” ABD 6:978. Taussig, In the Beginning Was the Meal, 74–75 explains this overlap by explaining the libation: “The action of the libation generally included . . . pouring a small bit of wine into a cup, dedicating the cup to a god . . . taking a sip of the wine, and passing the cup around to all those reclining, who also took a sip . . . The prayer accompanying the libation asked the particular god for help . . . . Sometimes, the libation prayer and the paean were the same thing.” Aune, “Worship, Early Christian,” ABD 6:978. Athenaeus, Deipn. 5.179, 149. Athenaeus further points out that meat from sacrificed animals was preferred. Athenaeus Deipn. 4.140, 173; 11.459; 12.534. Morris, First Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians, 144. Conzelmann, 1 Corinthians, 173. Fee, Pauline Christology, 132. In other Patristic writings the co-relation between sacrificing to pagan gods and worship is also seen in 2 Clem 3:1 and Mart. Pol. 12:2.The practice of consuming meat or food sacrificed to idols is also attested outside of Paul in the NT in Acts 15:29; 21:25; Rev 2:14, 20 where the same word eivdwlo,qutoj is used. Robertson and Plummer, First Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians, 216. Fee, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 475. Fitzmyer, First Corinthians, 393. Beale, We Become What We Worship, 223. Beale, We Become What We Worship, 224. Beale, We Become What We Worship, 225; Thiselton, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 775; Robertson and Plummer, First Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians, 216. Fee, Pauline Christology, 132. The MT of Deut 32:17a similarly reads, ~yhil{a/ h;l{a/ al{ ~ydIVel; WxB.z>yI  / “They sacrificed to demons, not God." The RSV has, “They sacrificed to demons which were no gods." The plural “gods" in the RSV (cf. ESV) may be due to ~yhil{a, which can be translated either as a singular (when referring to YHWH) or in the plural when referring to pagan gods. The use of the NRSV and most translations should be preferred as the emphasis is on the contrast between God and the demons. The LXX also employs the singular qeo,j making the reference to God as the better reading and translation. Robertson and Plummer favor the reading “a no-god." Robertson and Plummer, First Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians, 216. Beale, We Become What We Worship, 227–28. Brown, Introduction to the New Testament, 521–22.

NOTES

| 357

451. Dennis E. Smith, From Symposium to Eucharist: The Banquet in the Early Christian World (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2003). 452. Smith, From Symposium to Eucharist, 175. 453. Smith, From Symposium to Eucharist, 176 (italics mine). 454. Smith argues that there would be no need for early Christians to adjourn in a separate room for worship after the meal principally because the Greco-Roman house was designed in such a fashion that hospitality and entertainment of guests all took place in one room, the dining room, or the andron or triclinium, which was large enough to accommodate a fair number of people. Smith, From Symposium to Eucharist, 179. 455. Smith, From Symposium to Eucharist, 178–80, 200–201, 282. 456. Smith, From Symposium to Eucharist, 281. 457. Smith, From Symposium to Eucharist, 282. 458. E. P. Sanders, “Jewish Association with Gentiles and Galatians 2:11–14,” in The Conversation Continues: Studies in Paul and John in Honor of J. Louis Martyn (ed. Robert T. Fortna and Beverly Gaventa; Nashville: Abingdon, 1990), 178. This Jewish restriction against Gentile wine is still observed today in orthodox Jewish circles. 459. Morris, First Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians, 145. 460. Taussig, In the Beginning Was the Meal, 78. 461. Beale, We Become What We Worship, 227. 462. The notion of eating and drinking being associated with sacrifice in OT appears in Ps 50:13 where YHWH rhetorically asks whether he eats the flesh of bulls or drinks the blood of goats. The implied answer is a negative. The use of the negative particle mh, in LXX Ps 49:13 when used as an interrogative implies a negative answer. The implied idea inherent in this text nonetheless is that there is a perceived relationship between eating and drinking and sacrifice. The sacrifices referred to in Ps 50:13 refer to the sacred sacrifices in the Jerusalem temple. Beale, We Become What We Worship, 227n48. 463. In 1 Cor 10:7, Paul quotes from golden calf episode in LXX Exod 32:6: o` lao.j fagei/n kai. piei/n kai. avne,sthsan pai,zein / “the people sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to play.” The reference to eating and drinking here is associated with Israel’s idolatrous worship of the golden calf. The term pai,zw (“play”) may be a reference to idolatrous sexual play as the context bears out. See BDAG, 750. On the relationship of 1 Cor 10:7 to the golden calf episode in Exod 32, see Meeks, “‘And Rose Up to Play’: Midrash and Parenesis in 1 Cor 10:1–22”: 69–72. Beale also notes that later Judaism (Tem. 28b) understood Israel’s idolatry in the wilderness as involving “committing illicit sexual intercourse with the golden calf on a spiritual level.” Beale, We Become What We Worship, 238. 464. Fee, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 473. See also Brian S. Rosner, “‘Stronger Than He?’ The Strength of 1 Corinthians 10:22b,” Tyndale Bulletin 43.1 (1992): 171–79. 465. Fitzmyer, First Corinthians, 394; Raymond F. Collins, First Corinthians (ed. Daniel J. Harrington; SP 7; Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1999), 381. 466. Capes, Old Testament Yahweh Texts in Paul’s Christology, 150–51; Robertson and Plummer state that 1 Cor 10:21 “almost necessitates a reference to Christ.” Robertson and Plummer, First Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians, 218.

358

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

467. As Fee notes, “As always, Paul distinguishes between qeo,j and ku,rioj.” Fee, Pauline Christology, 133. 468. Fee, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 473n55. Here Fee also notes that Paul is indicating that the condition of the Corinthians are no better than that of ancient Israel’s. 469. Robertson and Plummer, First Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians, 218. 470. Capes, Old Testament Yahweh Texts in Paul’s Christology, 150–51. Also see Hurtado, Lord Jesus Christ, 112. I recognize that the tetragrammaton YHWH is absent in the LXX but is present in the MT. I only employ it for the sake of nomenclature. 471. See also 1 Kgs 14:22; Ps 77:58; cf. Bar 4:7. 472. Fee, Pauline Christology, 133. 473. Beale, We Become What We Worship, 226. 474. Deuteronomy 32:16, 21 says: “They provoked me to anger with strange gods; with their abominations they bitterly angered me . . . . they have provoked me to jealousy with that which is not God, they have exasperated me with their idols.” The accompanying text of 1 Cor 10:22a says: “Or do we provoke the Lord to jealousy?” 475. Fee, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 473n56. 476. Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 88.164. 477. Fee, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 474. In Exod 34:14, YHWH says his name is “Jealous” and that he is “a jealous God” (cf. Exod 20:5). For OT motifs of God’s jealousy for his people and their devotion to him alone, see Exod 34:14; Deut 4:24; 32:21; Joel 2:18; Zech 1:14; 8:2. 478. Fee, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 474n57. The risen Jesus here is clearly the Lord who is being provoked. Dunn is therefore in error when he asserts that the Corinthian Christians “must be careful to avoid provoking God to jealousy by its idolatry.” Dunn, Theology of Paul, 621. Fitzmyer, Conzelmann, and Collins like Dunn also assume the referent here is God. Fitzmyer, First Corinthians, 394–95; Conzelmann, 1 Corinthians, 174; Collins, First Corinthians, 381. It is the Lord Jesus whom Paul refers to as being provoked in the immediate context and not God. C. K. Barrett correctly notes that the Lord in 1 Cor 10:22 probably means Jesus. Barrett, Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians, 238. 479. What is particularly interesting is that Paul seems to not only assert that the Lord Jesus is provoked to jealousy by the idolatry of the Corinthians, but that the preexistent Christ was the very one whom Israel provoked in the wilderness. Fee comments that the one “whom they are testing by going to pagan feasts, had already experienced such ‘testing’ by Israel . . . . It is precisely the presence of Christ in Israel’s story that will make all of this work as a warning to the Corinthians.” Fee, Pauline Christology, 94 (italics mine in first clause). The key Pauline passages that speak of the preexistent Christ being tempted by the Israelites is 1 Cor 10:4 where Christ is said to be the rock that followed Israel. The allusion to the preexistent Christ being “the rock” also has significance in terms of the titles of YHWH. I noted above that Paul draws on Deut 32:16, 21 and ties it in 1 Cor 10:22 to make a parallel between YHWH and the Lord Jesus being provoked to jealousy. It is significant to note that while Paul calls the preexistent Jesus “the rock” in 1 Cor 10:4, the OT text of Deut 32:4, 15, 18, 30–31, 37 in the MT calls YHWH rWc, the “rock.”

NOTES

| 359

See BDB, 849. The LXX in these passages does not employ the word “rock” but rather uses the term qeo,j, which would indicate if the MT is older in these readings that the “rock” was clearly seen as a metaphorical description of God. This would also indicate that Paul had the Hebrew reading of the OT in mind here rather than that of the LXX. See Erik Waaler, The Shema and the First Commandment in First Corinthians (WUNT 2/253; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2008), 63n70. See also S.  R. Driver, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Deuteronomy (ed. S. R. Driver, A. Plummer, and C. A. Briggs; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1965), 350–51. On 1 Cor 10:4, see Fee, Pauline Christology, 95–97. Fee unfortunately does not address here the Deuteronomic “rock” passages in relation to Christ. Capes in his published dissertation work, Old Testament Yahweh Texts in Paul’s Christology, also neglects to treat these very important YHWH passages as they are related to the risen Jesus. On the rock imagery in Deuteronomy and Paul’s application of this imagery to the risen Jesus, see Hays, First Corinthians, 161. YHWH is also called “rock” in 1 Sam 2:2; Ps 18:3, 32; 95:1; Isa 30:29; 44:8. The term “rock” is applied to God in the OT thirty-four times, according to Michael P. Knowles. “‘The Rock, His Work is Perfect’: Unusual Imagery for God in Deuteronomy XXXII,” Vetus Testamentum 39.3: 307. For further works on 1 Cor 10:4, see Douglas McCready, He Came Down from Heaven: The Preexistence of Christ and the Christian Faith (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2005), 90–91; David Moessner, “‘And all were baptized into Moses . . . and the rock was Christ.’ Moses as ‘Typos’ of a Faith-less Israel in Paul’s Warnings of Idolatry to the Church in Corinth (1 Cor. 10:1–22)” in Saint Paul and Corinth (ed. C. J. Belezos; Athens, Greece: Psichogios Publications, 2009), 2.303–17 (paper presented at the International Congress on “The Apostle Paul and Corinth,” 23–25 September 2007, sponsored by the Prefecture of the Municipality of Corinth, Greece). Fee, Pauline Christology, asserts: “Paul is not allegorizing” in his reference to Christ as the rock who followed Israel. This view that what Paul intends is the real preexistence of Christ is also supported by Anthony Tyrrell Hanson, Jesus Christ in the Old Testament (London: SPCK, 1965), 10–25; Conzelmann, 1 Corinthians, 167; Fee, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 449. The other passage is 1  Cor 10:9, mhde. evkpeira,zwmen to.n cristo,n kaqw,j tinej auvtw/n evpei,rasan kai. u`po. tw/n o;fewn avpw,llunto / “We must not put Christ to the test, as some of them did, and were destroyed by serpents.” The reading of cristo,n instead of ku,rio,n is the harder reading and to be preferred over ku,rio,n. Some ancient MSS do favor the reading “Christ” instead of “Lord.” Either reading still supports a christological interpretation as “Lord,” which was Paul’s favorite designation for the risen Jesus, and this point is further reinforced by 1 Cor 10:22. Metzger argues that “Christ” is the best attested reading and is textually related to 1 Cor 10:4. It is also according to Metzger the more difficult reading, thus more than likely to be the original reading. See Metzger, Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, 494. See also Hays, First Corinthians, 164–65; Waaler, Shema and the First Commandment in First Corinthians, 437n779. On the question of the preexistence of Christ in Paul’s letters, see L. W. Hurtado, “Pre-Existence,” DPL, 743–46. Hurtado provides a helpful bibliography on this subject. 480. Segal, “Risen Christ and the Angelic Mediator Figures in Light of Qumran,” 317. Also see Segal, Two Powers in Heaven.

360

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

481. Segal seems to take an “apotheosis” view that “Jesus can be said to have attained to divinity.” Segal, “Risen Christ and the Angelic Mediator Figures in Light of Qumran,” 322. It is also very highly doubtful Paul would have subscribed to this view as he viewed Jesus as preexistent and co-creator of all things prior to his incarnation (1 Cor 8:6; Phil 2:6; cf. Col 1:16–17). This would imply that Jesus already had the status of divinity, or better yet, deity. On apotheosis, see W. von Martitz, TDNT 8:336. Hengel also lapses into this misleading use of language when he states “the ‘apotheosis of the crucified Jesus’ must have already taken place in the forties [CE].” Hengel, Son of God, 5. Wright points out that Paul steers away from any notion of apotheosis like that of the Roman emperors when he deals with the resurrection and exaltation of Jeus. Wright, Resurrection of the Son of God, 243. Hurtado likewise asserts, “It is certainly correct to say that Jewish monotheism would have worked against the deification of Jesus along the lines of the apotheosis of figures that we know of elsewhere in the religious environment of the Roman period.” Hurtado, Lord Jesus Christ, 51. The risen Jesus for Paul was not deified; he was included in the unique divine identity of God (1 Cor 8:6). 482. On the source criticism of this passage (2 Cor 6:14–7:1) by various scholars, see Werner Georg Kümmel, Introduction to the New Testament (trans. Howard Clark Kee; Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1975), 281–93. Kümmel comments that “there is no adequate basis for regarding the text as non-Pauline” (291). Also see Borchert, Worship in the New Testament, 101–2. For an opposing view, see Joseph A. Fitzmyer, “Qumran and the Interpolated Paragraph in 2 Cor 6:14–7.1,” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 23 (1961): 271–80. This need not detain this study as my interests do not lie in the source criticism of the text itself. 483. See William J. Webb, “Unequally Yoked Together with Unbelievers—Part 1: Who Are the Unbelievers (a;pistoi) in 2 Corinthians 6:14?” Bibliotheca Sacra 149/593 (1992): 27–44. Paul’s concept of mismatching probably finds its source in the OT proscriptions against mismatching different kinds of seeds, garments, and animals under the same yoke (Lev 19:19; Deut 22:10). This exegetical tendency by Paul in applying OT passages referring to animals to humans in a metaphorical context can be see in Paul’s citation of Deut 25:4 in 1 Cor 9:9–10, 9

evn ga.r tw/| Mwu?se,wj no,mw| ge,graptai Ouv fimw,seij bou/n avlow/nta mh. tw/n bow/n me,lei tw/| qew/| 10 h" di h`ma/j pa,ntwj le,gei di h`ma/j ga.r evgra,fh o[ti ovfei,lei evp evlpi,di o` avrotriw/n avrotria/n kai. o` avlow/n evp evlpi,di tou/ mete,cein / “9 For it is written in the law of Moses, ‘You shall not muzzle an ox while it is treading out the grain.’ Is it for oxen that God is concerned? 10 Or does he not speak entirely for our sake? It was indeed written for our sake, for whoever plows should plow in hope and whoever threshes should thresh in hope of a share in the crop” (NRSV).

Here Paul applies a proscription on muzzling an ox to a human application. The pastoral letter of 1 Tim 5:18 also cites Deut 25:4, and it also applies the passages to those who labor in preaching and teaching in the faith community (1  Tim 5:17–18). Paul applies this concept to a human level of spiritual relationships, which indicates that unity of the same kind was an important theme for Paul. On Paul’s emphasis on the unity of

NOTES

484.

485. 486. 487.

488. 489. 490.

491.

| 361

the Christian community, see Rom 12:4–5; 1 Cor 10:17; 12:12–13, 20, 25; cf. Eph 2:16; 4:4; Col 3:15. Paul also admonishes the Philippian community to be evn e`ni. pneu,mati mia/| yuch/| / “ in one spirit,” “one mind” (Phil 1:27). While Paul uses e`terozugou/ntej, another Pauline hapax legomenon, to describe a mismatched or unequally yoked relationship (2 Cor 6:14) (Gingrich and Danker, Shorter Lexicon of the Greek New Testament, 79), he uses the opposite su,zugoj,“yoke fellow” in Phil 4:3 to designate a Christian partner in the community (ibid., 188). The noun su,zugoj is also a Pauline hapax legomenon. The noun su,zugoj in Phil 4:3 is perhaps a descriptive noun “true comrade” (NASB), “true companion” (NET; NKJV), “loyal yokefellow” (NIV), “true yokefellow” (KJV; RSV), “true partner” (NLT). Some scholars believe su,zugoj may have been an actual proper name “Syzygus.” See Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 42.45. The identity of this su,zugoj does not concern us, only the meaning of the word. For a discussion on the identity of the su,zugoj, which remains speculative in scholarship, see Moisés Silva, Philippians, 192–93. On the prohibitions of mismatching in the OT, see Murray J. Harris, The Second Epistle to the Corinthians: A Commentary on the Greek Text (NIGTC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005), 498–99. There is a minor textual variant in 2  Cor 6:16, “For we are the temple of the living God.” Some MSS read h`mei/j (“we”), using the first person plural pronoun, while others have u`mei/j (“you”; î46 C Dc G K Y 614 Byz Lect itg, ar vg syrp, h goth arm al), the second person plural pronoun. Metzger points out that h`mei/j is to be preferred as it is strongly supported by both Alexandrian and Western witnesses (a B D 33 81 itd copsa, bo al). The latter variant may have arisen by a scribal attempt to harmonize 2 Cor 6:16 with 1 Cor 3:16, which uses the second person plural pronoun in reference to the faith community being the temple of God. The use of the second person plural pronouns in 2 Cor 6:14, 17 also would have influenced a scribal hand to harmonize 6:16 with these verses. The textual variant makes little difference to the force of the passage, which has the Christian congregation as the collective referent in mind. See Metzger, Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, 512. See Keener, 1–2 Corinthians, 43. See sec. 4.1.1. in chap. 4. Xavier Paul B. Viagulamuthu, Offering Our Bodies as a Living Sacrifice to God: A Study on Pauline Spirituality Based on Romans 12,1 (Tesi Gregoriana Serie Spiritualità 7; Roma: Editrice Pontificia Universitate Gregoriana, 2002), 367. See sec. 5.1. in chap. 4. See Gordon D. Fee, “II Corinthians vi.14–vii.1 and Food Sacrificed to Idols,” NTS 23 (1977): 140–61. A similar idea is found in John 15:19; 17:11, 14–16 where Jesus asserts that while his disciples are in the world, they are not of the world but distinct from it because they have been chosen out of the world by God and given to Jesus. Jesus also asserts that he is not of the world nor is his kingdom of this world (John 17:14, 16; 18:36). It is by the disciples’ association with Jesus that they become separate from the world. OT passages cited by Paul: (v. 16) Exod 29:45; Lev 26:12; Jer 31:1; Ezek 37:27; (v. 17) Isa 52:11; (v. 18) Hos 1:10; Isa 43:6. See 2 Cor 6:16–18 RSV footnotes. Paul quotes

362

492.

493.

494.

495.

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

these OT passages completely yet in a piecemeal fashion by stringing a series of sayings as if by memory. W. J. Conybeare and J. S. Howson comment that, “St. Paul, as usual, quotes from memory.” W. J. Conybeare and J. S. Howson, The Life and Epistles of St. Paul (London: Longman, Brown, Green, and Longmans, 1852–1853; new ed.; London: Longmans, Green, 1883), 451n3. William Barclay also asserts, “[H]e [Paul] quoted from memory, and so long as he got the substance right he did not worry about the actual wording.” William Barclay, The Letters to the Corinthians (2nd ed.; Daily Study Bible; Edinburgh: Saint Andrew Press, 1956), 248–49. Capes notes that Paul “quoted the Old Testament rather loosely at times . . . . he did the same with the sayings of the earthly Jesus.” Capes, Old Testament Yahweh Texts in Paul’s Christology, 82. See also Fee, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 292n10. On Paul’s use of Scripture in this passage, see J. M. Scott, “The Use of Scripture in 2  Corinthians 6:16c-18 and Paul’s Restoration Theology,” JSNT 56 (1994): 73–99; Scott Hafemann, “Paul’s Use of the Old Testament in 2  Corinthians,” Interpretation 52.3 (July 1998): 246–57. On Paul’s general use of Scripture, see Jeremy Punt, “Paul and the Scriptures of Israel: How Much Hermeneutical Awareness Did He Display?” Neotestamentica 34.2 (2000): 311–28. See sec. 1.3. in chap. 3 for discussion on the worshipping community as the family of God. See Paul’s emphasis on the fatherhood of God or God as “Father,” which was a theme also found in the OT (Deut 32:6; Isa 63:16; 64:8; Jer 3:4, 19; Mal 2:10) and may also have had polemical overtones against pagan deities, some of whom were also addressed as “father.” Paul’s Hellenistic communities would probably be aware of this nomenclature. The Stoic philosopher Aratos greets Zeus with the words cai/re pa,ter, “Hail, father.” See Delling, Worship in the New Testament, 83. William Barclay points out that: “The Greeks called Zeus the father of gods and men; the Romans called their chief god Jupiter, which means Deus pater, God the Father.” Barclay, Letters to the Galatians and Ephesians, 129. Homer gave Zeus the title of “father of both humans and gods.” Homer, Od. 1.28, 11.544. Paul is aware that in his Hellenistic world there was the belief in many gods and many lords (qeoi. polloi. kai. ku,rioi polloi,; 1 Cor 8:5) and Paul counters this belief polemically by asserting that there is only “one God the Father” and “one Lord Jesus Christ” (ei-j qeo.j o` path,r . . . ei-j ku,rioj VIhsou/j Cristo,j; 1 Cor 8:6) for Christian believers. In Rom 12:1, which was surveyed above, it should be noted that while Paul employs a metaphor closely associated with the temple (that of sacrifice) when he calls on the Roman Christians to offer up their bodies as living sacrifices, he does so by appealing to them as avdelfoi,, which in the plural denotes “brothers and sisters” (NRSV). BDAG, 18 notes regarding avdelfo,j that, “The pl[ural] can also mean brothers and sisters.” The phrase “brothers and sisters” is in bold lettering in BDAG to indicate emphasis. On the generic usage of the plural avdelfoi, for “brothers and sisters,” see Mark L. Strauss, Distorting Scripture? The Challenge of Bible Translation and Gender Accuracy (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1998), 147–51. This would also include eating food offered to idols. See Fee, “II Corinthians vi.14-vii.1 and Food Sacrificed to Idols,” 140–61.

NOTES

| 363

496. Barnett, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 347. Barnett refers to the Corinthian unbelievers as “unconverted Gentiles.” The precise definition here matters very little since an unbeliever for Paul is by definition a non-Christian, a nonmember of the faith community. Hans Dieter Betz suggested that the unbelievers mentioned in 2 Cor 6:14 are Gentile Christians who refused to obey the Jewish law. Betz arrives at this supposition by suggesting that 2 Cor 6:14–7:1 is not Pauline and that is in fact an anti-Pauline fragment. Hans Dieter Betz, “2 Cor 6:14–7:1: An Anti-Pauline Fragment?” JBL 92 (1973): 89–90. Betz’s arguments do not appear convincing and have failed to convince the majority of Pauline scholars. The word a;pistoj / “unbeliever” is used by Paul elsewhere in his letters and is known in the Pauline tradition (1 Cor 6:6; 7:12–15; 10:27; 14:22–24; 2 Cor 4:4; cf. 1 Tim 5:8; Titus 1:15). 497. Barnett, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 342. 498. The strong denunciation of idols and the uncompromising refusal of God to share his glory with another is forcefully expressed in Isa 42:8, ~yliysiP.l; ytiL'hit.W !Tea,-al{ rxea;l. ydIAbk.W ymiv. aWh hw"hy> ynIa] / “I am the Lord, that is my name; my glory I give to no other, nor my praise to idols [“graven images” RSV]” (NRSV). LXX Isa 42:8, evgw. ku,rioj o` qeo,j tou/to, mou, evstin to. o;noma th.n do,xan mou e`te,rw| ouv dw,sw ouvde. ta.j avreta,j mou toi/j gluptoi/j / “I am the Lord God: that is my name: I will not give my glory to another, nor my praises to graven images.” Interestingly, while Isa 42:8 states that God will not share his glory with another, in the Fourth Gospel Jesus asserts that he did share the glory of God with the Father before the world was made (John 17:5). John 17:5, kai. nu/n do,xaso,n me su, pa,ter para. seautw/| th/| do,xh| h-| ei=con pro. tou/ to.n ko,smon ei=nai para. soi,  / “And now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you before the world existed” (ESV). Raymond Brown argues that Jesus speaks here of the glory he had with the Father before the world existed, and Brown links this thought with John 17:24 where the Father is said to love the Son before the foundation or creation of the world. Brown also notes that the preexistence of Jesus is presupposed, and he alludes as a parallel to the personified Wisdom tradition in the OT which is depicted as preexistent with God (Prov 8:23 cf. Wis 7:23); hence Brown speaks of Jesus’ “pre-creational glory.” See Raymond E. Brown, The Gospel According to John: xiii-xxi (AB 29A; Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1970), 753–54. John Marsh notes that here Jesus speaks of “that unitary glory that the Son shares eternally with the Father.” Marsh, Gospel of Saint John, 559. B. F. Westcott notes that the glory Jesus speaks of sharing is a sharing “in actual possession and not as the object of the divine thought.” Westcott, Gospel According to St. John, 240. Alfred Plummer also notes that the use of the imperfect e;cw (“I had”) implies “continual possession” of the glory Jesus had with the Father. Alfred Plummer, The Gospel According to St. John (Cambridge: University Press, 1891), 309. The use of the imperfect in John 17:5 ties in with the imperfect verb h=n in John 1:1 speaking of the eternal existence of the Logos. 499. Barnett, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 345. 500. See sec. 1.1.2. of chap. 4. 501. This is seen when one observes the uses of such terms as ei;dwlon (1 Cor 8:4, 7; 10:19; 12:2; 2 Cor 6:16 cf. Rom 2:22; 1 Thess 1:9); eivdwloqu,twn “meat sacrificed to idols” (1 Cor

364

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

8:1, 4, 7, 10; 10:19); eivdwlolatri,a (1 Cor 10:14 cf. Gal 5:20; Col 3:5); eivdwlola,trhj (1 Cor 5:11 cf. Eph 5:5); and eivdwlei/on, a Pauline hapax legomenon (1 Cor 8:10). Paul is so overtaken with the issue of idols (particularly in 1 Cor), that scholars have noted that in an earlier letter, no longer extant, Paul had written (:Egraya u`mi/n evn th/| evpistolh/| mh. / “I wrote to you in my letter”) and warned the Corinthians about associating with, among others, idolaters (1 Cor 5:9–11). Hawthorne, Martin, and Reid, Dictionary of Paul and His Letters, 164, 425. Some scholars are of the opinion that part of this nonextant letter of Paul is preserved in 2 Cor 6:14–7:1, the section we have reviewed, because it addresses the issue of association with unbelievers, including a strong denunciation of idolatry. See Morris, First Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians, 22–23. This issue is a text critical one and should not detain us. 502. This passage, particularly 2 Cor 6:14, is usually cited by many Christians as a prohibition against marriage between a Christian and a non-Christian, or in some cases a prohibition against Christians courting or dating non-Christians. While this may be an extension of what Paul communicates in his prohibition about being unequally yoked or mismatched, Paul’s primary concern is that of separating true worship from what he perceives to be false worship. In short, the context clearly bears out that the issue at hand is that of worship. Alfred Plummer notes, “The meaning [of being mismatched] is not to be confined to mixed marriages.” Alfred Plummer, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Second Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians (ICC; Edinburgh: T&T Clark; New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1956), 206. Paul does not wish the Corinthian believers to compromise their worship of God with the worship of idols. While 2 Cor 6:14 does not deal with mismatched marriages in its immediate context, Paul does hold nonetheless that Christian marriage should be between believers, “only in the Lord” (1 Cor 7:39). In cases where one of the spouses later became a Christian, Paul admonishes them to patiently remain in the marriage with the unbelieving partner and hope for their conversion (1 Cor 7:12–16). 503. Paul argues in a series of rhetorical questions that there can be no metoch, (“partnership”) between righteousness and lawlessness, no koinwni,a (“fellowship”) between light and darkness (v. 14), no sumfw,nhsij (“agreement”) between Christ and Beliar, and Paul asks ti,j meri.j pistw/| meta. avpi,stou, “what does a believer share with an unbeliever?” (v. 15). Paul uses the analogy of two contrasting categories in 2 Cor 6:14–16 to differentiate his community from unbelievers as follows:

Pauline Worshipping Community righteousness light Christ believer temple of the living God

Unbelievers lawlessness darkness Beliar unbeliever idols

Regarding Paul’s reference to Belia,l, “Belial” (KJV, NKJV, NIV, NASB, RSV), Belia,r is a hapax legomenon in Paul and the NT as a whole. Belia,r appears to be a

NOTES

| 365

spelling variant for Belia,l, which appears to be original as it is attested in the OT, LXX Judg 20:13: ui`ou.j Belial; Judg 20:13; 1 Sam 10:27 (MT): l[;Y:÷lib.-ynE)B.; Second Temple literature (Jub. 1:20); and the Dead Sea Scrolls. See Foerster, TDNT 1:607. For Belial in the Dead Sea Scrolls and Pseudepigrapha, see Foerster, TDNT 7:152–56. 504. A similar thought is found in Matt 6:24: Ouvdei.j du,natai dusi.n kuri,oij douleu,ein\ h" ga.r to.n e[na mish,sei kai. to.n e[teron avgaph,sei h" e`no.j avnqe,xetai kai. tou/ e`te,rou katafronh,sei ouv du,nasqe qew/| douleu,ein kai. mamwna/| / “No one can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammon [“wealth” NRSV; “Money” NIV cf. ESV, NET]” (RSV). As it is impossible to serve two masters, God and mammon, it is equally impossible in Paul’s mind to serve or worship at two temples, that of God and idols.

Chapter Five: Practical Expressions of Worship in the Pauline Letters 1. Louw-Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 53.53. 2. So the majority of the translations: KJV, NKJV, ASV, ESV, NASB, NET, NIV, NLT, RSV, NRSV, NJB, NAB, and NEB. 3. Italics in 1 Cor 10:31 are mine. A similar command is given in Col 3:17, kai. pa/n o[ ti eva.n poih/te evn lo,gw| h" evn e;rgw| pa,nta evn ovno,mati kuri,ou VIhsou/ euvcaristou/ntej tw/| qew/| patri. di auvtou/ / “And whatever you do, in word or work, do everything in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him.” Here the risen Jesus factors into the worship of God in that everything that is done in thanksgiving to God should be in Jesus’s name and through him. Jesus thus becomes the agent through whom (di auvtou/) God is thanked and as such, is acknowledged and worshipped. The preposition indicates here that God is the indirect object of thanks (tw/| qew/|). A similar reading is seen in Eph 5:18: euvcaristou/ntej pa,ntote u`pe.r pa,ntwn evn ovno,mati tou/ kuri,ou h`mw/n VIhsou/ Cristou/ tw/| qew/| kai. patri,  / “giving thanks to God the Father at all times and for everything in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ” (NRSV). The idea in this passage is the same. God is the object of thanks (tw/| qew/|) and this action should be done “at all times” (pa,ntote) and in the name (evn ovno,mati) of Jesus. 4. Louw-Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 53.53. 5. BDAG, 373. 6. Morris, Epistle to the Romans, 388. 7. Schmidt, TDNT 3:496–500. 8. Thiselton, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 78. 9. BDAG, 373 gives this definition as the first meaning of evpikale,w. For the use of invocation in other religious social contexts such as Mesopotamia, see Alan Lenzi, “Invoking the God: Interpreting Invocations in Mesopotamian Prayers and Biblical Laments of the Individual,” JBL 129.2 (2010): 303–15. 10. Xenophon, Cyrop. 7.1.35, ࠗမဎ˗่۟͘‫ڗ‬࿳ߥ์›Ԇ໵Ǔड़‫ڗ‬࿰ࢆๆဎङဎ / “or invoked the gods.”

366

11. 12. 13. 14.

15. 16. 17.

18.

19. 20.

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

Plato, Tim. 27c, ۟͘‫ڗ‬࿱ߥࠗ͘໵Ǔ໇۟͘ඨߥ์›Ԇ໵Ǔड़‫ڗ‬࿰ࢆๆဎ‫ڗ‬࿰ߥ / “invoke gods and goddesses.” Polybius, Hist. 15.1.12–13. Delling, Worship in the New Testament, 84. Cleanthes’s Hymn to Zeus, Fragment 537, line 1 quoted in Barrett, New Testament Background, 63. The calling or invoking of Zeus in prayer is attested in Homer, Od. 4, 341; 20, 201; Homer, Il. 1, 503; 3, 365; Archiloch, Fr. 94 (Diehl3, I, 3, 41); Hesiod, Fr. 161, 1; Pindar, Pyth. 4, 194; Pindar, Nem. 8, 35; 9, 31; Pindar, Isthm. 6, 39; Sophocles, Oed. col. 1268; Sophocles, Trach. 275; Euripides, Hel. 1441; Aristophanes, Ach. 224. Cleanthes’s Hymn to Zeus, Fragment 537 quoted in Barrett, New Testament Background, 63. Apuleius, Metam. 11.2 quoted in Delling, Worship in the New Testament, 114. Pliny the Younger, Ep. Tra. 10:96.5 (italics mine). Letters and Panergyricus (trans. Betty Radice; Loeb Classical Library; Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1969), 2:287. What should also be noted here is that in addition to invocation of the Roman gods, offerings of wine and incense are given to the statue of the emperor Trajan, which indicates the emperor is also perceived as an object of worship. Philo, Spec. 1.272 says: mo,nh| yuch/| ta.j nohta.j poiou,menoi diexo,douj kai. evkboh,seij( w-n e]n mo,non ou=j avntilamba,netai to. qei/on / “the worshippers making their exclamations and invocations with their soul alone, and there is but one ear, namely, that of the Deity which hears them” (translation mine). The Pauline references: Rom 10:12–14; 1 Cor 1:2 and 2 Tim 2:22 appear in sec. 1 of BDAG, 373, and 2 Cor 1:23 appears in sec. 4 of BDAG, 373. In 2 Cor 1:23, Paul writes, VEgw. de. ma,rtura to.n qeo.n evpikalou/mai evpi. th.n evmh.n yuch,n o[ti feido,menoj u`mw/n ouvke,ti h=lqon eivj Ko,rinqon / “But I call on God as witness against me: it was to spare you that I did not come again to Corinth” (NRSV). It is clear from the context of this passage that Paul is calling on or invoking God as a witness to the veracity of his statement. Note the Vulgate’s rendering of 2 Cor 1:23 as “ego autem testem Deum invoco in animam meam” (italics mine). See Plummer, Second Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians, 42; Dunn, Theology of Paul, 48n116 notes that, “To call on God as witness . . . was common in both Greek and Jewish literature.” The NLT of 2 Cor 1:23 attempts to capture the legal aspect of Paul’s use of evpikale,w: “Now I call upon God as my witness that I am telling the truth.” God is invoked here as both witness and judge against Paul’s life. Harris, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 212. Josephus also uses evpikale,w to describe the taking of oaths between two parties where they evpikalou/ntai to.n qeo.n ma,rtura / “called upon God as the witness.” Josephus, Ant. 1.243. Josephus also records the prohibition of oaths among the Essenes. Josephus, War. 2.135. Second Corinthians 1:23 is the only place in the Pauline letters where Paul uses evpikale,w in reference to God. The use of evpikale,w in 2 Cor 1:23 is not one of worship per se but functions in a legal context where God is invoked as a witness to the veracity of Paul’s statements to the Corinthian worshipping community. The use of evpikale,w in 2 Cor 1:23 is thus not one of worship per se but functions in a legal context where God is invoked as a witness to the veracity of Paul’s statements. Schmidt, TDNT 3:499 recognizes this point and comments regarding the meaning of evpikale,w in 2 Cor 1:23 that “it

NOTES

21. 22.

23. 24.

25. 26. 27.

28. 29. 30.

31.

32. 33.

| 367

is almost a prayer,” but as noted, the context of 2 Cor 1:23 is rather a legal or judicial one instead of one invlolving worship. All other uses of evpikale,w in Paul (1 Cor 1:2; Rom 10:12–14; cf. 2 Tim 2:22) are used in a worship context. Porter, Paul: Jew, Greek, and Roman, 1–4. This is also the case when it involves the attempted self-deification of a pagan king to the status of a god. In Jdt 3:8, Nebuchadnezzar desires that all the nations worship only him (mo,nw| tw/| Naboucodonosor latreu,swsi) and that they should evpikale,swntai auvto.n eivj qeo,n / “call upon him as a god.” Capes, Old Testament Yahweh Texts in Paul’s Christology, 120. Richard N. Longenecker, Studies in Paul: Exegetical and Theological (Sheffield, UK: Sheffield Phoenix, 2004), 30. Longenecker admits here that evpikale,w in Paul “appears in prayer contexts.” That this verb carries connotations of prayer is seen in the first definition provided in BDAG, 373, that evpikale,w is “to call upon deity for any purpose.” The act whereby the worshipper addresses God vocally as in invocation is constitutive of prayer. Stanley, Boasting in the Lord, 7. BDB, 894. See Mark J. Boda, Daniel K. Falk, and Rodney A. Werline, eds., Seeking the Favor of God: The Origins of Penitential Prayer in Second Temple Judaism (vol. 1; Early Judaism and its Literature 21; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2006). I note below two texts from Second Temple Judaism that contain invocations with evpikale,w, namely, Bar 3:7; Jdt 16:1. Other texts which contain evpikale,w in invocation passages include among the Apocrypha: 1 Esd 6:32; Jdt 3:8; 6:21; 9:4; 2 Macc 3:15, 22, 31; 7:37; 8:2; 12:6, 15, 18, 36; 13:10; 14:34, 46; 15:21–22; Wis 7:7; 11:4; 13:17 (in reference to invoking or calling upon idols); Sir 2:10; 46:5, 16; 47:5; 48:20; 51:10. Pseudepigrapha: 3 Macc 1:27; 5:7; 6:1; 12:17; Pss. Sol 2:36; 5:5; 6:1; 7:7; 9:6; 15:1. Hurtado, At the Origins of Christian Worship, 79. O’Brien, Epistle to the Philippians, 247. 1 Kgs 18:26, WnnEë[] l[;B;äh; ‘rmoale ~yIr:Üh\C'h;-d[;w> rq,Bo'h;me l[;B;h;û-~veb. Waår>q.YIw:WnnEë[] / “and [they] called on the name of Baal from morning until noon, crying, ‘O Baal, answer us!’”; cf. LXX: kai. evpekalou/nto evn ovno,mati tou/ Baal evk prwi,qen e[wj meshmbri,aj kai. ei=pon evpa,kouson h`mw/n o` Baal evpa,kouson h`mw/n / “and [they] called on the name of Baal from morning till noon, and said, ‘Hear us, O Baal, hear us.’” Note the repeated emphasis in the LXX, kai. ei=pon evpa,kouson h`mw/n o` Baal evpa,kouson h`mw/n / “Hear us, O Baal, hear us.” G. J. Wenham notes that the Hebrew expression hw"ßhy> ~veîB. ar"±q.yI refers to worshipping YHWH through prayer and sacrifice. G. J. Wenham, Genesis (WBC; Dallas: Word, 1987), 1:116, 281. The formula of invocation also appears as ar")q.a, hw"åhy> ~veÞb.W / “On the name of YHWH I will call.” Thayer describes the expression as “to invoke, adore, worship.” Thayer, New Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon, 239. The NET translates Gen 21:33 as, “There he [Abraham] worshiped the Lord, the eternal God.” Here the NET recognizes hw"hy> ~veB. ~v'-ar"q.YIw: in the MT and kai. evpekale,sato evkei/ to. o;noma kuri,ou in the LXX to function as an idiom to indicate worship.

368

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

34. Note NET translation of Gen 26:25, “Then Isaac built an altar there and worshiped the Lord” (italics mine). 35. Other OT texts which contain the invocation formula are Ps 78:6; 79:18; 104:1; 118:4; Isa 64:6; Jer 10:25. 36. The idea of addressing God in invocation and his hearing and responding to the supplicant’s E Y] w: : ytiar"q' yLi ht'rC" B' ; hw"hy>-la / cry is seen in Ps 120:1 (LXX Ps 119:1). The MT reads, ynIn[ “In my distress I called [“cried”; KJV, ASV, NASB, NET] to the Lord, and he answered me” (ESV). Here we have the relational aspect of worship highlighted: the worshipper calls or cries out to YHWH, YHWH hears, and responds. This is the communication model found in prayer which I will expand further below. The Hebrew verb ar'q' when used with YHWH as the referent usually denotes invocation in worship. See BDB, 894. God is usually described in the OT as the one who hears prayer (e.g., Ps 65:2). In 2 Chr 7:11–15, YHWH tells Solomon that he has heard his prayer regarding the consecration of the temple. YHWH then instructs that when his people pray and seek his face he will hear from heaven. Here we find the relational aspect in prayer as a communicative act both in an individual case (Solomon), and a collective case (the people of Israel). The people pray, God hears, and responds. God is the object of prayer, whereas the human or humans are the subject(s) that perform the action of prayer. 37. Orr and Walther, 1 Corinthians, 143. 38. In Gen 48:16, for instance, when Jacob blesses Manasseh and Ephraim, he states, “May they be called by my name and the names of my fathers Abraham and Isaac” (NIV). In being called by the names of the patriarchs or ancestors, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, both Manasseh and Ephraim would be identified and associated with them along familial lines. 39. Tolmie, “Salvation as Redemption: The Use of ‘Redemption’ Metaphors in Pauline Literature,” in Salvation in the New Testament: Perspectives on Soteriology (ed. Jan G. van der Watt; New Testament Studies 121; Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2005), 255. 40. Orr and Walther, 1 Corinthians, 143. In Exod 19:5, YHWH calls Israel “my own possession among all the peoples” (ESV; italics mine). On the idea of Israel as YHWH’s possession also, see Exod 34:9; Deut 7:6; 14:2; 26:18 (Israel is called a treasured possession); Ps 135:4; and Mal 3:17. 41. This is seen for example in 2 Sam 12:28 where Joab informs David that he has fought against Rabbah (2 Sam 12:27) and has taken its water supply, and he encourages David to formally take the city by military force “or I myself will take the city, and it will be called by my name.” Here the hypothetical taking of the city of Rabbah and calling it by Joab’s name indicated possession and ownership. When David conquered Zion, he named it after himself, “the city of David” (2 Sam 5:7, 9). Robert Gordon notes that “[t]he calling of a person’s name over a thing betokened his ownership of it.” Robert P. Gordon, I & II Samuel: A Commentary (Library of Biblical Interpretation; United Kingdom: Paternoster; Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1986), 260. ' n] : ynIa/] “I am their inheritance” (RSV), and ~t'Zx" au ] ynIa/] 42. In Ezek 44:28 YHWH declares ~t'lx “I am their possession” (RSV). Holladay notes that in Ezek 44:28 YHWH is “the possession of the priests.” Holladay, Concise Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament, 10.

NOTES

| 369

43. LXX 2 Chr 7:14, o` lao,j mou evfV ou]j to. o;noma, mou evpike,klhtai / “my people, on whom my name is called.” Other OT passages which convey the idea that those who are called by YHWH’s name are his possession are Amos 9:12; Isa 63:19; Jer 14:9; 15:16; Dan 9:19; Bar 2:15. 44. LXX Isa 43:6–7 also reads: 6 evrw/ tw/| borra/| a;ge kai. tw/| libi, mh. kw,lue a;ge tou.j ui`ou,j mou avpo. gh/j po,rrwqen kai. ta.j qugate,raj mou avpV a;krwn th/j gh/j 7 pa,ntaj o[soi evpike,klhntai tw/| ovno,mati, mou evn ga.r th/| do,xh| mou kateskeu,asa auvto.n kai. e;plasa kai. evpoi,hsa auvto,n / 6 I will say to the north, Bring; and to the south, Keep not back; bring my sons from the land afar off, and my daughters from the ends of the earth; 7 even all who are called by my name: for I have prepared him for my glory, and I have formed him, and have made him” (italics in original). 45. See footnotes in 2 Cor 6:16–18 (RSV). In Hos 1:10, daughters are not mentioned but only sons: yx'-lae ynEB./ / “sons of the living God” (RSV). LXX Hos 1:10 reads the same ui`oi. qeou/ zw/ntoj / “sons of the living God.” The NRSV translates Hos 1:10 as a generic by using the neuter plural, “Children of the living God.” It is most likely that since Paul mentions both sons and daughters of God, he had Isa 43:6 in mind. 46. The word ku,rioj does not appear at the end of the text but is implied. J. Weiss, Der erste Korintherbrief (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1910), 4 took the position that the phrase in 1 Cor 1:2b, su.n pa/sin toi/j evpikaloume,noij to. o;noma tou/ kuri,ou h`mw/n VIhsou/ Cristou/ evn panti. to,pw| auvtw/n kai. h`mw/n / “together with all who call upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ in every place, their [Lord] and ours” to be probably a scribal gloss and an interpolation of an early copyist who wished to stress the universality of the church. In a similar vein, Kümmel also took the position that the phrase in 1 Cor 1:2b was a “non-Pauline” interpolation, “an ‘ecumenical’ supplement,” and “[b]ecause this letter which is concretely aimed at the Corinthians could not have been intended for Christianity as whole, the additional comment [1 Cor 1:2b] . . . is regarded as impossible.” Kümmel, Introduction to the New Testament, 275. Weiss’and Kümmel’s position, however, cannot be sustained and remains unfounded with no textual evidence in support of it. All the extant MSS of 1 Cor 1:2 contain this phrase. Metzger in his Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament does not even address this issue in his analysis of 1 Cor 1:2 simply because there is no such variant in the MS tradition. As I have noted above, the reference or appeal to worship practices in other churches is a common Pauline motif in 1 Cor as seen not only in here in 1:2, but also in 1 Cor 4:17; 7:17; 11:16; and 14:33. Thiselton, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 73 dismisses Weiss’s arguments (and we can add Kümmel’s arguments) as “groundless conjecture.” 47. As Robertson and Plummer note here in 1 Cor 1:2 regarding th/| evkklhsi,a| tou/ qeou/ the “genitive is possessive.” Robertson and Plummer, First Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians, 2; See also Thiselton, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 73. 48. Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 53.44. 49. Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 53.44; Morris, First Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians, 36. 50. Robertson and Plummer note that, “The perfect participle indicates a fixed state.” Robertson and Plummer, First Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians, 2. Also see Collins, First Corinthians, 46.

370

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

51. Moo, Epistle to the Romans, 891. Dunn also notes that, “Paul deliberately evokes the language of the sacrificial cult.” Dunn, Theology of Paul, 543. 52. Fee recognizes the allusion to the temple cult in 1 Cor 1:2 when he states, “Believers are set apart for God, just as were the utensils in the Temple.” Fee, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 32. 53. Fee himself acknowledges that in Paul’s use of h`giasme,noij, he is employing it as a metaphor. Fee, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 32n21. 54. Fee, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 32n21. 55. Collins, First Corinthians, 46. 56. Morris, Epistle to the Romans, 434. The sacrifices in the OT were also seen as being the possession of YHWH and therefore they were “holy” (cf. Lev 6:25). 57. Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 53.44. 58. The NIV has “called to be holy.” Thiselton notes that a`gi,oij and h`giasme,noij as cognate terms. Thiselton, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 76. 59. Thiselton, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 76. 60. Morris, First Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians, 36. Morris, however, proceeds to question whether Paul had believers everywhere in mind and thinks that Paul may be referring to only the Corinthians. Morris argues this on the grounds that he feels that the Corinthian letter was not intended to be cyclical letter or a “general manifesto” for a wide distribution across other churches. I note, however, that Morris’s point in irrelevant to the statement Paul makes in 1 Cor 1:2. Paul’s statement about the sharing of the Corinthian believers su.n pa/sin . . . evn panti. to,pw is descriptive of Christian practice presumably in the worship gatherings of other Christian faith communities. Paul would have had other Christian worshipping communities in mind. That Paul referred to the worship practices of other churches outside of Corinth is evident in 1  Cor 11:16 and 14:33–34. In 1  Cor 16:1, Paul mentions that the same order he gave to the “churches of Galatia” he gives to the Corinthians regarding the fund collection for the saints (believers). In 1 Cor 16:19, Paul tells the Corinthian church that “the churches of Asia” send their greetings to them as does Aquila and Prisca with “the church that meets in their house.” In 2 Cor 8:1, Paul shares news with the Corinthians about “the churches of Macedonia.” In 2 Cor 8:18, Paul mentions a believer who will accompany Titus who is known “among all the churches” and who was “appointed by the churches” (2  Cor 8:19). Paul describes his Christian brothers in ministry as “messengers of the churches” (2 Cor 8:23–24). Paul is anxiously concerned “for all the churches” (2 Cor 11:28). Paul also responds sarcastically to the claim that he had burdened the Corinthian church more than “the other churches” (2 Cor 12:13). Other Pauline letters which were not considered cyclical also make reference to other churches (Gal 1:22; 1 Thess 2:14; cf. 2 Thess 1:4). It is clear that the Corinthian believers were at least familiar through Paul of other churches outside of their immediate circle. Whether or not the Corinthian letter was intended originally to be a cyclical letter, the fact of church history cannot obscure the reality that in due time many of Paul’s letters became cyclical letters by virtue of their lectionary value in the churches. See Bruce M. Metzger, The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption and Restoration (New York: Oxford University Press, 1968; repr., 1992). Fee also comments similarly to

NOTES

| 371

Morris that the Corinthian letter was not intended for “all Christian everywhere.” Fee, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 33. The point, however, is that Paul’s comments in 1 Cor 1:2 while not addressed to “all Christians everywhere” is descriptive of the communal gatherings of Christians everywhere, particularly in the invocation of the risen Jesus. Fee, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 34 does come to acknowledge this when he comments, The universal nature of the church is further emphasized by the phrase “everywhere” . . . Thus the Corinthians are being reminded that they are not alone; rather there are those all over the world who call on the name of the Lord when they meet together . . . [Paul] intended to go beyond his own churches to all the churches of the saints. 61. Thiselton, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 77. 62. T. W. Manson, Studies in the Gospels and Epistles (Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press, 1962), 192, 208–9. Manson notes as well that this phrase has been attested in some Jewish synagogue inscriptions. 63. Translation is mine. 64. Capes, Old Testament Yahweh Texts in Paul’s Christology, 164. 65. Contra Wilhelm Bousset, Kyrios Christos: Geschichte des Christusglaubens von den Anfängen des Christentums bis Irenaeus. (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck  & Ruprecht, 1913), and Bultmann, Theology of the New Testament, 1:124–25. See Marshall, The Origins of New Testament Christology, 24–29, 32–39. On Bousset’s position, see comments by K. G. Kuhn, TDNT 4:470–71. Schweitzer noted that Paul had more in common with Jesus and the primitive church and that the “Hellenization of Christianity as a process” was something that was “wholly subsequent to Paul.” Paul was firmly planted in the Jewish soil from which the early Christian movement arose. See R. B. Matlock, Unveiling the Apocalyptic Paul: Paul’s Interpreters and the Rhetoric of Criticism (JSNTSup 127; Sheffield, UK: Sheffield Academic Press, 1996), 24–25. 66. Daniel A. Smith, Revisting the Empty Tomb: The Early History of Easter (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2010), 18. It should be noted that there appears to be in the first century no hint at all of any Christian worship or veneration of or at the tomb of Jesus by his earliest followers as Dunn contends. Dunn, Jesus Remembered, 837–38. This view has been challeneged primarily by Edward Schillebeeckx, Jesus: An Experiment in Christology (New York: Seabury Press, 1979), 331, 334, 336, 702. 67. Schmidt, TDNT 3:498. 68. Luke also shows knowledge of this phrase from the LXX as well (Acts 2:21; 7:59; 9:14, 21; 22:16). 69. Morris comments, “It is unusual to have Christians described as those who call on the name of Christ . . . in using the expression [of invocation] Paul is assigning the highest possible place to Christ.” Morris, First Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians, 36 (italics in original). Morris notes the connection here with the invocation of YHWH in Joel 2:32. 70. Capes, Old Testament Yahweh Texts in Paul’s Christology, 120. 71. Josephus, Ant. 8.339 (cf. 8.338). Also see War. 2.394 where Josephus asks Jews who have not been faithful to Judaism, pw/j de. evpikale,sesqe to. qei/on pro.j th.n a;munan oi` paraba,ntej

372

72.

73. 74.

75.

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

e`kousi,wj th.n eivj auvto. qerapei,an / “and how will you call upon God to assist you, when you are voluntarily transgressing against his religion?” In War. 5.438, Josephus relates a prayer of some Jews as evpikaloume,nwn o;noma tou/ qeou/ metadou/nai,  / “calling upon the tremendous name of God.” On invoking God in Josephus, see also Ant. 4.222; 7.202; 8.283; 9.8; 17.64. Johannes Weiss calls the emergence of the inclusion of the risen Jesus within Christian worship “the most significant step of all in the history of the origins of Christianity.” J. Weiss, History of Primitive Christianity, 1:37. Bauckham, “Jesus, Worship of” ABD 3:812 also comments, “The prevalence and centrality of the worship of Jesus in early Christianity from an early date has frequently been underestimated.” Schmidt, TDNT 3:498. The majority of scholars recognize that it is a consistent Pauline feature to apply YHWH texts from the OT and attribute them to the risen Jesus. This is the main thesis of Capes, Old Testament Yahweh Texts in Paul’s Christology. An example of the identification of Jesus by the application of YHWH texts is seen in 1 Cor 1:8 where Paul mentions the eschatological phrase th/| h`me,ra| tou/ kuri,ou h`mw/n VIhsou/ Cristou/  / “the day of our Lord Jesus Christ” where the allusion is to the OT day of YHWH or “day of the Lord” (Joel 1:15; Amos 5:18). Paul in the space of a few words (between 1 Cor 1:2 to 1:8), readily applies the divine title “Lord” to Jesus, first in the context of invocation (1:2), and secondly in an eschatological context (1:8). See Fee, Pauline Christology, 46–47, 406–7; 568–69. The day of YHWH / the Lord in the OT has become synonymous in Paul with the “day of the Lord” Jesus in his letters. The application of LXX passages where ku,rioj (YHWH; MT) is the referent is already applied by Paul to Jesus in his earliest letter of 1 Thess. This is evident in 1 Thess 5:2, auvtoi. ga.r avkribw/j oi;date o[ti h`me,ra kuri,ou w`j kle,pthj evn nukti. ou[twj e;rcetai / “For you yourselves know very well that the day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night.” The h`me,ra kuri,ou / “the day of the Lord” is a term as we have seen which is used in the OT for the day of YHWH’s judgment and reckoning with the nations (Isa 2:11–12; 13:6–13; Ezek 30:3; Joel 1:15; 2:32; 3:18; Amos 5:18–20; Obad 15–17; Zeph 1:7–18; 2:2–3; Zech 14:1, 13, 20–21; Mal 4:1, 5). In 1 Thess 5:2 (cf. 2 Thess 2:2), Paul also uses variants to this such as h`me,ran Cristou/  / “the day of Christ” (Phil 1:10). Stanley, Boasting in the Lord, 170. Fee notes that “the phrase belongs altogether to the prophetic tradition, referring to the great future day of Yahweh” and that “Paul is again appropriating and applying to Christ a well known Yahweh-phrase.” Fee, Pauline Christology, 46. On the usage of ku,rioj for Jesus and its OT antecedents, see L. W. Hurtado, “Lord,” DPL, 560–69. For this reason I must reject Shirley J. Case’s contention that, “Ku,rioj does not imply that Christ is elevated to the place of Yahweh, but is descriptive of his heavenly authority over the [faith] community in the spiritual sphere.” Shirley J. Case, “KURIOS as a Title for Christ” JBL 26 (1907): 160. The elevation of Jesus to the place of YHWH seems to be clearly set out in the Carmen Christi (Phil 2:9–11; cf. Isa 45:23) and as we shall see 1 Cor 8:6 further supports this position. Hurtado notes that the invocation of Jesus in the early Christian community, (the earliest of which would be those whom Paul corresponded with), intended to function as “a

NOTES

| 373

direct association and analogy between their devotion to Jesus and the Old Testament cultic devotion to Yahweh.” Hurtado, At the Origins of Christian Worship, 79. 76. Orr and Walther, 1 Corinthians, 142–43. 77. Hurtado, Lord Jesus Christ, 197–200; Hurtado, “Binitarian Shape of Early Christian Worship,” 187–213; Hurtado, One God, One Lord, 5; Morris, First Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians, 36; Thiselton, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 78–80; Fee, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 33. Fee notes here that to “call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ” means fellow believers, “who have put their trust in him [Jesus] and pray to and worship him” (italics mine); Robertson and Plummer note regarding 1 Cor 1:2, “St. Paul significantly brings in the worship of Christ under the O.T. formula for worship addressed to the LORD God of Israel. To be a believer is to worship Christ.” Robertson and Plummer, First Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians, 3; Dunn, Theology of Paul, 257; Robert M. Bowman Jr. and J. Ed Komoszewski, Putting Jesus in His Place: The Case for the Deity of Christ (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2007), 162; Marion C. Soards, 1  Corinthians (New International Biblical Commentary; New Testament Series; Peabody, MA: Hendrickson; Carlisle: Paternoster, 1999), 22; O. Cullmann, “All Who Call on the Name of our Lord Jesus Christ,” Journal of Ecumenical Studies 1 (1964): 1–21; Robert Louis Wilken and Judith L. Kovacs, eds, 1  Corinthians: Interpreted by Early Christian Commentators (Church’s Bible; Grand Rapids; Cambridge, UK: Eerdmans, 2005), 14; O’Brien, Epistle to the Philippians, 247; Loren T. Stuckenbruck and Wendy E. S. North, eds., Early Jewish and Christian Monotheism (London: T&T Clark, 2004), 128; Martin, “Aspects of Worship in the New Testament Church,” 12–13; Keener, 1–2 Corinthians, 21–22; Capes, Old Testament Yahweh Texts in Paul’s Christology, 164 notes, Paul used [ku,rioj] primarily as a christological title in declarations of religious devotion and worship to Jesus . . . Several factors in Paul’s letters indicate that Jesus was the focus of worship and devotion in the early churches . . . [they] referred to themselves as those who call upon the name of the Lord Jesus Christ (1 Cor 1:2).

78. 79. 80. 81. 82.

D. Coggan makes the remark that “Christolatry preceded Christology.” D. Coggan, The Prayers of the New Testament (London: Hodder, 1967), 80. It would seem unlikely that such worship of Jesus would have merely arisen separate and wholly apart from an understanding of the identity of Jesus. One must know what one worships before worshipping it, otherwise it is worship in ignorance. In John 4:22, Jesus tells the Samaritan woman that she does not know what she worships, but the Jews know whom they worship. Marsh points out that Jesus makes an accusation here of the Samaritan woman’s “ignorance of the object of worship.” Marsh, Gospel of Saint John, 217. Dunn, Theology of Paul, 257. Hurtado, One God, One Lord, 107. See also J. Herrmann, TDNT 2:790. Delling, Worship in the New Testament, 118. Delling, Worship in the New Testament, 118. Delling, Worship in the New Testament, 118n5. Delling nevertheless concedes that there are examples of isolated cases where prayer is addressed to Jesus, and he cites 2 Cor 12:8

374

83. 84. 85. 86. 87.

88. 89. 90. 91. 92.

93.

94.

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

as an example. Delling, Worship in the New Testament, 119. I will treat the passage of 2 Cor 12:8–10 more fully below. BDAG, 373. Delling, Worship in the New Testament, 118. Orr and Walther, 1 Corinthians, 143. Thiselton, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 78. See also Leslie C. Allen, The Books of Joel, Obadiah, Jonah, and Micah (NICOT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1976), 104n36. Morris, First Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians, 36; Barnett, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 222; Bauckham, Jesus and the God of Israel, 129; Fee, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 33–34n26; Thiselton, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 78; Schmidt, TDNT 3:498; Capes, Old Testament Yahweh Texts in Paul’s Christology, 119–21, 123. Wiles, Paul’s Intercessory Prayers, 55n3. Wiles, Paul’s Intercessory Prayers, 55n3. Wiles, Paul’s Intercessory Prayers, 55n3. BDB, 894. On Paul’s apostolic claim and authority, see John Howard Schütz, Paul and the Anatomy of Apostolic Authority (New Testament Library; Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2007). Paul Barnett is therefore mistaken concerning Paul in this case when he states, “The invocation of the ‘Father’ in prayer, common to the traditions of Paul and Peter, points back to Jesus’ distinctive teaching about God as ‘Father’.” Paul Barnett, Jesus and the Rise of Early Christianity: A History of New Testament Times (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1999), 172. All the references in the Pauline letters to invocation in the context of worship have the risen Jesus as their direct referent not God. Capes, Old Testament Yahweh Texts in Paul’s Christology, 120. The other NT passages Capes notes where evpikale,w is used of Jesus are the Acts passages (Acts 2:21; 9:14; 21; 22:16). Capes, however, is mistaken, for while the majority of NT texts including Paul have Jesus as the referent of evpikale,w, in 1 Pet 1:17 God the Father is clearly the referent of evpikale,w. First Peter 1:17 says, Kai. eiv pate,ra evpikalei/sqe to.n avproswpolh,mptwj kri,nonta kata. to. e`ka,stou e;rgon evn fo,bw| to.n th/j paroiki,aj u`mw/n cro,non avnastra,fhte / “If you invoke as Father the one who judges all people impartially according to their deeds, live in reverent fear during the time of your exile” (NRSV). In 1  Pet 1:14, the readers are called te,kna u`pakoh/j / “obedient children” with God as the implied father, which is shown in v. 17. See Peter H. Davids, The First Epistle of Peter (NICNT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990), 70; Wayne A. Grudem, The First Epislte of Peter: An Introduction and Commentary (Tyndale New Testament Commentaries; Leicester, UK: Inter-Varsity Press; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988), 80. Capes does not have 1 Pet 1:17 noted in his index of cited passages. See Capes, Old Testament Yahweh Texts in Paul’s Christology, 218. Schmidt, TDNT 3:497 acknowledges the use of evpikale,w with God the Father as the referent in 1 Pet 1:17 and he cites the passage. Schmidt thus notes, “Often in the NT the believer calls on God or Christ, or the name of God or Christ, in prayer.” Schmidt, TDNT 3:497. It is surprising that Capes would miss the reference in 1 Pet 1:17 since he cites Schmidt, TDNT 3:496–500 in Capes, Old Testament Yahweh Texts in Paul’s Christology, 208.

NOTES

| 375

95. This indicates from the dating of 1 Cor (50–55 CE), that Jesus was invoked in the early Christian communities at an early stage, at least twenty or more years following the death of Jesus. See Capes, Old Testament Yahweh Texts in Paul’s Christology, 181–83. 96. See sec. 8.1.2. in chap. 4. 97. This definition equally applies in a plural or communal context where the human subjects would function as the worshippers and God as the worshipped object. 98. F. Hahn, The Titles of Jesus in Christology (London: Lutterworth, 1969), 102, 110. For a detailed study on the theme of the worship of Jesus, see Richard Bauckham, “Jesus, Worship of” in ABD 3:812–19. Also see Richard Bauckham, “The Worship of Jesus in Apocalyptic Christianity,” NTS 27 (1981): 322–41. 99. Capes, Old Testament Yahweh Texts in Paul’s Christology, 120. 100. Thiselton, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 78. On Joel 2:32, see Allen, Books of Joel, Obadiah, Jonah, and Micah, 101–5. 101. On the identification of believers with or in association with Christ in the Pauline letters see Stephen O. Stout, The ‘Man Christ Jesus’: The Humanity of Jesus in the Pauline Letters (Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock, 2011), 208–28. 102. Dunn, Theology of Paul, 396. Other NT writers hardly use the phrase, but it appears in 1 Pet 3:16; 5:10, 14. On the expression “in Christ,” see further Adolf Deissmann, Die Neutestamentliche Formel “in Christo Jesu” (Marburg: N. G. Elwert, 1892). In addition to the expression or phrase “in Christ,” there is also the repeated Pauline phrase “in the Spirit.” On these two expressions or phrases, see Andrie Du Toit, “‘In Christ’, ‘in the Spirit’ and Related Prepositional Phrases: Their Relevance for a Discussion on Pauline Mysticism,” Neotestamentica 34.2 (2000): 287–98. 103. Dunn, Theology of Paul, 396. Dunn notes here that this phrase was also used in the Apostolic Fathers (1 Clem. 32.4; 38.1; Ignatius, Eph. 1.1; Trall. 9.2) but that their usage is a reflection of Pauline influence. 104. See Dunn, Theology of Paul, 397. On the Pauline expression “with Christ,” see Dunn, Theology of Paul, 401–4. 105. David B. Capes, Rodney Reeves, and E. Randolph Richards, Rediscovering Paul: An Introduction to His World, Letters, and Theology (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press; Nottingham: APOLLOS, 2007), 229. Also see Dunn, Theology of Paul, 397–98. 106. Neyrey, Give God the Glory, 200–203, 246. 107. Paul usually couples the death of Jesus with his resurrection (Rom 4:25; 1 Cor 15:3–4), but here in Rom 10:9 he focuses primarily on his resurrection. The salvific efficaciousness of the death of Jesus is contingent on the resurrection of Jesus, for as Paul asserts in 1 Cor 15:14, if Jesus did not rise from the dead, then all Christian faith is vain and futile, which includes the soteriological significance of Jesus’ death. 108. Dodd, Epistle of Paul to the Romans, 166. 109. Following Rom 10:9 where Paul lays down the confession of Jesus as Lord and the belief in his resurrection from the dead, Paul goes on to introduce his points in Rom 10:10–13 with the preposition ga,r beginning in each of the verses, which is intended in these cases to denote a reason or explanation of the preceding statement. Morris, Epistle to the Romans, 386–88. The preposition ga,r of course never stands first at the beginning of a sentence.

376

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

110. Moo, Epistle to the Romans, 658. Dunn makes the observation that the form of the confession in Rom 10:9 as “Jesus is Lord” rather than “Jesus Christ is Lord,” “suggests that lordship was first ascribed to the historically remembered individual, Jesus, before ‘Jesus Christ’ became the more established referent.” Dunn, Theology of Paul, 248n66. This of course presumes an evolutionary development from the simpler confession to the more complex, and the principle that the shorter reading or confession in this case is indicative of it being earlier. In and of itself, we cannot be absolutely sure which one was the earliest. Cullmann also was persuaded that the confession “Jesus is Lord” was due to its shortness, the earliest and primal confession. Oscar Cullmann, The Earliest Christian Confessions (trans. J. K. S. Reid; London: Lutterworth Press, 1949), 18–34. 111. Fee, Paul’s Letter to the Philippians, 225. 112. In Phil 2:11, Paul has the full compound name “Jesus Christ is Lord.” The ku,rioj title is closely associated with Jesus in Paul that it virtually becomes synonymous with Jesus and can also appear variously as “the Lord Jesus Christ” (Rom 1:7), “our Lord Jesus Christ” (2 Cor 1:3), “our Lord Jesus” (2 Cor 1:14), “Jesus Christ our Lord” (1 Cor 1:9 ), “Christ Jesus our Lord” (Rom 6:23), and simply as “the Lord Jesus” (Rom 14:14; Phil 2:19). Morris notes that “[t]he use of the full title our Lord Jesus Christ heightens the majesty of his Person.” Morris, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 230 (italics in original). In the MT, YHWH is also referred to as “the Lord YHWH” where the title “Lord” precedes the proper name YHWH. The compound name hwIhy> yn"doa] / “Lord Yahweh” appears frequently in address to or in reference to God (e.g., 2 Sam 7:18–19, 22, 29; Ps 16:2; o ]/ 68:20; 73:28; Isa 50:7, 9; 61:1; Jer 4:10). In Ezekiel alone, the compound name hwIhy> yn"da “Lord Yahweh” appears thirty-two times. The LXX avoids the compound name in the MT and collapses it into one by using ku,rioj instead. For a straight English translation o ] / “Lord Yahweh,” see the relevant biblical passages cited of the compound name hwIhy> yn"da in the NJB. 113. An example can be seen in the case of the Shema (Deut 6:4–5). According to the Babylonian Talmud (Sukkah 42a), Jewish boys were taught the Shema as soon as they could speak. The Shema was not considered a prayer but a confession of faith or a creed, and the practice of reciting the Shema daily is attested in the Mishnah (ca. 200 CE). The Mishnah states that the Shema was also recited by the priests in the Second Temple (Tamid 4:3; 5:1), indicating its practice prior to 70 CE. There is evidence of the recitation of the Shema in Second Temple Judaism as seen in its appearance in the Letter of Aristeas (ca. 150 BCE). See Marvin R. Wilson, Our Father Abraham: Jewish Roots of the Christian Faith (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans; Dayton: Center for Judaic-Christian Studies, 1989), 122–25. Wilson seems to contradict himself when he asserts, “The Shema is not a prayer . . . but a confession of faith” (123), and then later refers to “the well-known prayer called the Shema” (296). W. B. Hunter is also of the opinion that personal prayer was fixed to forms such as the Shema. Hunter, “Prayer,” DPL, 725. Also see G. Quell, TDNT 3:1079– 81; Kuhn, TDNT 3:359; Martin, Worship in the Early Church, 25; Martin, “Aspects of Worship in the New Testament Church,” 14; Joachim Jeremias, Prayers of Jesus (Studies in Biblical Theology 2.6; London: SCM, 1967), 66–81; Longenecker, Studies in Paul, 34–35. Cullmann notes that “[e]arly Christianity knew no sharp distinction between

NOTES

114. 115. 116.

117. 118. 119. 120.

121. 122. 123. 124.

125. 126.

127. 128.

| 377

the two; every confession was also a prayer.” Oscar Cullmann, Christology of the New Testament (London: SCM Press, 1959), 215. Marshall, Origins of New Testament Christology, 97. On the subject of Jesus as Lord, see Marshall, Origins of New Testament Christology, 97–110. Ziesler, Pauline Christianity, 35. Plummer, Second Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians, 118. Martin, however, presses the issue too far when he asserts: “that confession [“Jesus is Lord”] of Him [Jesus] took precedence over the confession of God.” Martin, “Aspects of Worship in the New Testament Church,” 16. Paul always kept his theology and Christology in balance. Even in Rom 10:9 where the confession “Jesus is Lord” is laid out Paul conjoins this confession with the belief that God raised Jesus from the dead. In so doing, Paul shows that the conditions of salvation involve both Jesus and God. In 1 Cor 8:6 Paul shows his balance in theology and Christology in maintaining that salvation comes from both God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. A number of scholars also regard 1 Cor 8:6 to be a “confession.” Fee, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 373–76. I will address 1 Cor 8:6 at further length below. Even in the Carmen Christi where the confessional formula “Jesus Christ is Lord” appears it is uttered “to the glory of God the Father” (Phil 2:11) so that again Paul brings both Jesus and God into balance. The confession “Jesus is Lord” results in the glorification of God. Fee, Paul’s Letter to the Philippians, 225. Richard N. Longenecker, The Christology of Early Jewish Christianity (London: SCM Press, 1970), 127. Capes, Old Testament Yahweh Texts in Paul’s Christology, 117 (italics mine). Marshall, Origins of New Testament Christology, 97; Kuhn, TDNT 4:471; Fee, First Epistle to the Corinthian, 838; Dodd, Epistle of Paul to the Romans, 167; Morris, Epistle to the Romans, 385; Fitzmyer notes that the “creedal and acclamatory . . . formula of the early Palestinian [Judean] church . . . [was] ‘Jesus is Lord’ (1 Cor 12:3; cf. 2 Cor 4:5; Phil 2:9–11).” Fitzmyer, Romans, 591. Cullmann, Earliest Christian Confessions, 28–29. Cullmann, Christology of the New Testament, 218–20. See Marie Joseph Lagrange, Saint Paul: Épître aux Romains (Paris: J. Gabalda, 1922), 253;Käsemann, Commentary on Romans, 291. I will address the subject of baptism and its relation to worship below in sec. 6.2. On baptism as the origin of the confession “Jesus is Lord,” see C. E. B. Cranfield, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans (6th ed.; ICC; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1979), 2:527; Dunn, Theology of Paul, 447; Dodd, Epistle of Paul to the Romans, 166–67; Martin, “Aspects of Worship in the New Testament Church,” 16. Ralph P. Martin, “Creed,” DPL, 191–92. Cullmann, Early Christian Worship, 22 (italics in original). See also Martin, Worship in the Early Church, 52–65; Delling, Worship in the New Testament, 77–91; Aune, “Worship, Early Christian,” ABD 6: 981; O. Michel, TDNT 5:199–213. Cranfield and Headlam, Epistle to the Romans, 2:527. See Neyrey, Give God the Glory, 170. Neyrey also agrees with the use of confession in the worship setting of early Christianity. Also see Hurtado, One God, One Lord, 100–114.

378

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

129. The confession “Jesus is Lord” appears in its earliest literary form in 1 Cor 12:3 according to Marshall, Origins of New Testament Christology, 105–6. Marshall’s point here can only be sustained if Phil is later than 1 Cor. If Phil is earlier, then the confession in Phil 2:11 would be earlier still than 1 Cor 12:3. This point need not detain us as Paul’s letters are the earliest Christian documents available. 130. See Dunn, Theology of Paul, 175. 131. J. L. Wu, “Liturgical Elements,” DPL, 557; See also W.  H. Gloer, “Homologies and Hymns in the New Testament: Form, Content and Criteria for Identification,” Perspectives in Religious Studies 11 (1984): 115–32. 132. Fitzmyer, Romans, 591 (italics mine). 133. William A. van Roo, The Christian Sacrament (Analecta Gregoriana; Roma: Editrice Pontifica Universita Gregoriana, 1992), 36–37. 134. Van Roo, Christian Sacrament, 37. 135. Tertullian, Mart. 3: “Sit nunc, benedicti, carcer etiam Christianis molestus. Vocati sumus ad militiam Dei vivi iam tunc, cum in sacramenti verba respondimus” / “Granted now, O blessed, that even to Christians the prison is unpleasant—yet, we were called to the service in the army of the living God in the very moment when we gave response to the words of the sacramental oath.” 136. Tertullian, Bapt. 1, 3–5, 8–9, 12–13. See Cross, Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, 1198. 137. Foerster, TDNT 3:1052 (italics mine). 138. Dodd, Epistle of Paul to the Romans, 167. 139. Dodd, Epistle of Paul to the Romans, 167. 140. Waaler, Shema and the First Commandment in First Corinthians, 428n746. 141. Dodd, Epistle of Paul to the Romans, 167–68 (bold lettering in original; italics mine). 142. The following examples are taken from Craig A. Evans, Ancient Texts for New Testament Studies: A Guide to the Background Literature (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2005), 311–12. Ptolemy XIII (80 BCE–51 BCE), “the Lord king God, a new Dionysius” (OGIS no. 186). Ptolemy XIV (59 BCE–44 BCE) and Cleopatra VII (69 BCE–30 BCE), “to the lords, the greatest of the gods” (Deissmann, 352). Claudius (41 CE–54 CE), “Tiberius Claudius lord” (SB no. 4331; cf. P. Oxy. 37); “Claudius god” (PSI no. 1235; P. Oxy. 713; SB nos. 8245, 8444. Nero (54 CE–68 CE), “Nero the lord” (O. Berl. No. 25); “Nero Caesar the lord” (SB no. 9604; cf. P. Oxy. 246); “good god” (OGIS no. 666). Vespasian (69 CE–79 CE), “Vespasian the lord” (P.  Oxy. 1439; SB no. 1927); “Vespasian god” (P. Oxy. 257, 1112, 1266, 1452, 2186. The same titles “lord” and “god” are ascribed in regal inscriptions to the emperors Titus and Domitian. See Evans, Ancient Texts for New Testament Studies, 312. Cranfield and Headlam doubt that the “Jesus is Lord” confession arose as a response to the “Caesar is Lord.” Cranfield and Headlam, Epistle to the Romans, 2:528. We cannot know this for sure, but it seems that the lordship of Jesus was closely associated with his resurrection (Rom 1:3–4; 10:9) and that

NOTES

143. 144. 145. 146. 147.

148.

149.

150. 151. 152.

153.

154.

| 379

it was used by the earliest Judean faith community (1 Cor 16:22), a point Cranfield and Headlam acknowledge. In 1 Cor 8:5, Paul acknowledges the many “lords and gods” of the Greco-Roman world but maintains that for Christian believers there is only “one” God and Lord (1 Cor 8:6). The claim that Jesus was Lord would have given rise to rivalry with the emperor taking the title “lord” to himself. On the Christian reference and polemic to the creed “Caesar is Lord,” see Polycarp Mart. Pol. 8.2 and Foerster, TDNT 7:175. BDAG, 917. The Greek Sebasto,j is a translation of the Latin Augustus. Foerster, TDNT 7:174. Foerster also notes that the emperor was given this title by the Roman Senate in 27 BCE. Foerster, TDNT 7:174. Foerster, TDNT 7:175. Cranfield and Headlam also see the confession “Jesus is Lord” as associated with worship. Cranfield and Headlam, Epistle to the Romans, 2:527. In n. 7 of the same page, Cranfield and Headlam refer to 1 Cor 12:3; 2 Cor 4:5 and Phil 2:11 as “relevant” texts. Paul’s use of pa,nta in 2 Cor 4:15 indicates a summation of what Paul has written, which also includes Paul’s preaching and the confession “Jesus Christ as Lord” in 2 Cor 4:5. Harris, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 356. What should be noted in 2 Cor 4:15 is that like Phil 2:11, God it the ultimate object of glory. Harris makes the linguistic connection between 2 Cor 4:5 and Phil 2:11. Harris, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 357n117. The glory of God, according to Barnett, is the end goal in 2 Cor 4:15. Barnett, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 244. Barnett also notes that “the glorification of God is the apostolic aim, but it is also the privilege and duty of every believer.” Barnett, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 245. The use of eivj reinforces the idea of intended goal. The act of thanksgiving is a theme in 2 Corinthians (1:11; 9:11–12), but here it is the means whereby God is glorified. Capes, Old Testament Yahweh Texts in Paul’s Christology, 118. Fee, Pauline Christology, 565 (italics mine). For further study on the lordship of Jesus and Rom 1:3–4, see Paul Beasley-Murray, “Romans 1:3f: An Early Confession of Faith in the lordship of Jesus,” Tyndale Bulletin 31 (1980): 147–54. The reading to.n ku,rion VIhsou/n / “Lord Jesus” in 2 Cor 4:14 is a textual variant. The evidence for the longer reading which includes ku,rion is diversely attested in a C D G K L P Y 88 614 Byz Lect itd, g syrh copbo goth eth, whereas the shorter reading, to.n VIhsou/n appears to have weighty evidence in î46 B and 33. Metzger holds that the longer reading is probably not original and its inclusion in the text is perhaps due to the “tendency of pious scribes to expand by adding ku,rion.” See Metzger, Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, 510–11. This variant, however, is entirely negligible to the point being made in this study. Elsewhere in his letters Paul speaks of God raising “Jesus from the dead” (evgei,rantoj to.n VIhsou/n evk nekrw/n; Rom 8:11), and also “God raised the Lord” (qeo.j kai. to.n ku,rion h;geiren; 1 Cor 6:14). Paul also uses both names in Rom 4:24: “him who raised Jesus our Lord from the dead” (to.n evgei,ranta VIhsou/n to.n ku,rion h`mw/n evk nekrw/n). Plummer, Second Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians, 118. Similarly Paul states that the essence of the gospel is Christ dead, buried, and risen (1 Cor 15:1–4).

380

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

155. Paul never states that Jesus raised himself from the dead, unlike the Fourth Gospel, which credits Jesus with the power to raise himself from the dead (John 2:19–21; 10:17–18). This unique Johannine emphasis is also later evident in the Patristic writer Ignatius, Smyrn. 2:1, kai. avlhqw/j e;paqen w`j kai. avlhqw/j avne,sthsen e`auto,n  / “And He suffered truly, even as also He truly raised up Himself.” On this Johannine resurrection theme, see the discussion in Van der Watt, Family of the King, 105–6; Morris, Gospel According to John, 456–57n53; James D. G. Dunn, Jesus and the Spirit: A Study of the Religious and Charismatic Experience of Jesus and the First Christians as Reflected in the New Testament (Philadephia: Westminster, 1975), 186; E. E. Ellis, “Background and Christology of John’s Gospel: Selected Motifs,” Southwestern Journal of Theology 31 (1988): 28–29. In Phil 3:21, however, Paul attributes to the risen Jesus a divine act usually ascribed to God in the OT, that of giving life and raising the dead (1 Sam 2:6; cf. 2 Kgs 5:7). God’s Spirit is also spoken of as giving life (Gen 1:2; Job 33:4; Ps 104:30; Ezek 37:4–5, 14). In Phil 3:21, it is the risen Jesus who raises the Christian dead at the parousia. Fee, Paul’s Letter to the Philippians, 383–84. It is the risen Jesus who is the subject of the action of transforming the present bodies of “humiliation” and transforming them to the body of his glory or his glorious body, o]j metaschmati,sei to. sw/ma th/j tapeinw,sewj h`mw/n su,mmorfon tw/| sw,mati th/j do,xhj auvtou/ / “He will transform the body of our humiliation that it may be conformed to the body of his glory” (NRSV). Paul seems to be conveying the idea that believers will be ultimately conformed to be like Christ at the parousia. Here the act of transforming the present bodies of believers to conform them to Christ’s own body of glory is said to be done directly by the risen Christ himself. The power by which the risen Jesus is said to do this is, kata. th.n evne,rgeian tou/ du,nasqai auvto.n kai. u`pota,xai auvtw/| ta. pa,nta / “by the power that also enables him to make all things subject to himself” is his own. Fee comments that, “Remarkably, in the present passage [Phil 3:21] the ‘subjecting’ of all things to himself is said to be by Christ’s own power.” Fee, Paul’s Letter to the Philippians, 384. In 1 Cor 15:45 Paul makes the same point that it is the risen Jesus himself who will be responsible in raising the dead bodies of believers. What Paul has customarily appropriated to God the Father as the one who raised Jesus from the dead and who will also raise believers from the dead (Rom 8:11; 1 Cor 6:14), he now appropriates here to the risen Jesus himself. He refers to the risen Jesus here as a pneu/ma zw|opoiou/n / “life giving spirit.” When Paul uses the root word zwopoie,w elsewhere, God is the one who is the referent of this action (Rom 4:17; 8:11; cf. 1 Tim 6:13) or the Spirit (2 Cor 3:6). In 1 Cor 15:45, it is the risen Christ himself who is designated by the participle. Louw and Nida define zwopoie,w as “to cause to live—‘to give life to, to make live.’” Louw and Nida, GreekEnglish Lexicon, 23.92. Fee sees the act of God giving life to Adam in Gen 2:7 (which Paul quotes in 1 Cor 15:45) as analogous to the risen Jesus giving life to the Christian dead. Fee, Pauline Christology, 118. As Fee argues, “[H]e [Christ] . . . became the giver of life to all who will ever follow after.” Fee, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 789. 156. In 1 Cor 6:14 Paul states “God raised the Lord [Jesus]” from the dead. Here he identifies the one raised by God as “the Lord” thus showing a relation between the identity of Jesus as Lord and his resurrection.

NOTES

157. 158.

159. 160. 161. 162. 163.

164.

| 381

The mention of the Holy Spirit in regards to the confession “Jesus is Lord” appears to be implicitly and indirectly linked and related to the resurrection of Jesus as well. The resurrection of Jesus has a pneumatological dimension to it. Paul believes that it was by the agency of the Spirit that God raised Jesus from the dead and will also raise the bodies of believers at the eschaton (Rom 8:11). The terms “Holy Spirit” (1 Cor 12:3), “the Spirit” (Rom 8:26), “Spirit of God” (Rom 8:14; 1 Cor 12:3), “Spirit of the Lord” (2 Cor 3:17) and the “Spirit of Christ” (Rom 8:9; Phil 1:19) including “the Spirit of his Son” (Gal 4:6) are all synonymous terms in the Pauline letters. In Rom 8:9 Paul draws all three terms “the Spirit,” “the Spirit of God,” and “the Spirit of Christ” together as synonymous designations. Note that in 1 Cor 12:3 both “Spirit of God” and “Holy Spirit” are used synonymously. See Fee, Pauline Christology, 269–70; Fee, To What End Exegesis? 266, 342–48. Fee notes that the typical Pauline style of attributing the LXX title of ku,rioj to Jesus is also evident in his pneumatology especially when one considers the synonymous, ‘Spirit of the Lord’ = ‘Spirit of Christ’. Fee laments the fact that very little has been written on this point. Fee, To What End Exegesis? 225n29, 340. A study of Pauline pneuatology is beyond the scope of this research. For a full treatment of Pauline pneumatology, see Fee, God’s Empowering Presence. On the negative statement that no one speaking by the Spirit of God can say, VAna,qema VIhsou/j / “Jesus be cursed!” (RSV), see Fee, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 578–81. On the Carmen Christi, see chap.  6 below. This seems to based on the idea that within the semantic range of exaltation, resurrection can be included in terms of “resurrection as exaltation.” J. Christiaan Beker, Paul the Apostle: The Triumph of God in Life and Thought (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1980), 156. Beker points out that, “Resurrection language is often synonymous with exaltation language.” Beker, Paul the Apostle, 168. It is better to express these words in terms of overlap rather than being synonymous. Collins and Collins also note that, “Paul shares with the Synoptics an emphasis on the exaltation of Jesus to his messianic office at the time of his resurrection.” Collins and Collins, King and Messiah as Son of God, 148 (italics mine). Martin Hengel likewise asserts that for Paul resurrection also includes the idea of glorification. Martin Hengel, Studies in Early Christology (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1995; London; New York, 2004), 154. In Phil 2:10–11, Paul will associate and connect the title of ku,rioj with the exaltation of Jesus, but it is notable that in Rom 10:9 Paul associates the title ku,rioj with Jesus in reference to his resurrection. Luke also associates the idea of glorification with the resurrection of Jesus (Acts 3:13). Fee, Paul’s Letter to the Philippians, 225. Moo, Epistle to the Romans, 657. Morris, Epistle to the Romans, 386; Capes, Old Testament Yahweh Texts in Paul’s Christology, 118. See sec. 1.2.3. of chap. 3. For a study on the theological emphasis on God in Romans, see Jochen Flebbe, Solus Deus: Untersuchungen zur Rede von Gott im Brief des Paulus an die Römer (Berlin: de Gruyter, 2008). The portion Paul quotes is from the end of LXX Isa 28:16: o` pisteu,wn evpV auvtw/| ouv mh. kataiscunqh/|  / “he that believes on him shall by no means be ashamed.” Paul seems to

382

165. 166.

167. 168. 169. 170. 171.

172.

173.

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

understand the referent of Isa 28:16 to be the li,qoj / “stone” which he takes to be a messianic reference to Jesus (cf. Rom 9:32–33). Capes, Old Testament Yahweh Texts in Paul’s Christology, 119. In Isa 8:13–15, the li,qoj / “stone” is also mentioned but in that passage it is YHWH / ku,rioj (LXX) who is the stone. Paul would have seen this YHWH passage as having reference to the risen Jesus, and he does in fact apply it to Jesus. On the use of Isa 8:13–15; 28:16 and Paul, see Capes, Old Testament Yahweh Texts in Paul’s Christology, 118–19, 121, 179. Dodd, Epistle of Paul to the Romans, 169. Paul is quoting from the LXX of Isa 28:16, which has the word kataiscu,nw, which means to disgrace, put to shame. Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 25.194. The MT contains the word vwx, which means “to make haste,” “to come quickly,” BDB, 301. The RSV renders the Isa 28:16 (MT) as, “He who believes will not be in haste.” The word “shame” is found in the reading in LXX Isa 28:16, kai. o` pisteu,wn evpV auvtw/| ouv mh. kataiscunqh/| / “and he that believes on him shall by no means be ashamed.” Borchert, Worship in the New Testament, 87. Sanday and Headlam, Epistle to the Romans, 291. Pindar, Isthm. 5.53. LXX Josh 3:11, 13, kuri,ou pa,shj th/j gh/j / “the Lord of all the earth”; LXX Ps 97:5, kuri,ou pa,shj th/j gh/j / “the Lord of all the earth”; LXX Mic 4:13, tw/| kuri,w| pa,shj th/j gh/j / “the Lord of the whole earth”; LXX Zech 4:14, tw/| kuri,w| pa,shj th/j gh/j / “the Lord of the whole earth.” Cf. 2 Macc 14:35, ku,rie tw/n o[lwn / “Lord of all.” The phrase appears once outside of Paul in Acts 10:36 where the reference is also to Jesus as pa,ntwn ku,rioj / “Lord of all.” The meaning of pa,ntwn ku,rioj in Acts 10:36 does bear a similarity to its usage in Rom 10:12. Acts 10:36 also designates Jesus as the Lord “of the Gentiles as well as of the Jews.” Paton J. Gloag, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1870), 1:380. Gloag comments here that the referent of Acts 10:36 is Jesus and not God. Fitzmyer, Romans, 593. Fitzmyer cites as examples 1QapGen 20.13 and 4Q409 1.6. Also note Josephus, Ant. 20.90. Fitzmyer, Romans, 592 states that the expression “Lord of all” refers to “all human beings.” Is it possible Paul is restricting the “all” here to believers only among the Jews and Gentiles? The ones who call upon the Lord Jesus would constitute the “all” as Rom 10:13 seems to make clear. Fitzmyer’s comments appear to be too universalistic at this point. Paul seems to clearly restrict this category to only Christian believers who invoke the Lord Jesus (1 Cor 1:2). It is interesting that in Rom 14:4, Paul uses the noun oivke,thj for a servant of the Lord Jesus. According to Louw and Nida, this noun refers to “a servant in a household—‘house servant, household servant, personal servant.’” Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 46.5. The Lord Jesus in this case is presented as the Lord or Master of his household, which in this case is the household of faith or the worshipping community; his followers are servants of and in his household. This paradigm suggests not only a relationship between Jesus the Lord and his household servants, but also an intimacy between the two. On the Haustafeln or household codes in the Pauline corpus, see Dibelius, An die Kolosser Epheser an Philemon, 43–50, 93–96; Crouch, Origin and Intention of the Colossian

NOTES

174. 175. 176.

177.

178. 179.

180. 181. 182. 183. 184.

185.

186.

| 383

Haustafel; D. L. Balch, “Household Codes,” 25–50; Verner, Household of God; Gehring, House Church and Mission, 229–60. Cranfield and Headlam, Epistle to the Romans, 2:528–29. Capes, Old Testament Yahweh Texts in Paul’s Christology, 119. Gert Steyn notes that “[t]he name of the ku,rioj was pronounced loudly during the rite of their baptism.” Gert Steyn, “Reflections on to. o;noma tou/ kuri,ou in 1 Corinthians,” in The Corinthian Correspondence (ed. R. Bieringer; BETL 125; Leuven, Belgium: Leuven University Press; Louvain: Peeters, 1996), 490. See Plummer, Second Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians, 240–42. I agree with Plummer and other scholars that Paul believed in the preexistence of Jesus. Douglas McCready commernts that “from the earliest days of his ministry Paul believed in Christ’s preexistence.” McCready, He Came Down from Heaven, 80. For a discussion of the various views on preexistence including the preexistence of Jesus, see McCready, He Came Down from Heaven, 15–19; Lincoln D. Hurst, “Christ, Adam and Preexistence Revisted,” 84; Jürgen Habermann, Präexistenzaussagen im Neuen Testament (Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 1990), 91–157. On the view that Paul does not teach a personal preexistence of Jesus, see Dunn, Theology of Paul, 266–93. Dunn provides a helpful bibliography on the subject on pages 266–67. See sec. 1.1. of chap. 3. Ephesians 2:4 also speaks of God as being “rich in mercy”; “riches of his grace” (Eph 1:7; 2:7); “riches of his glory” (Eph 3:16); the writer also speaks of “the riches of Christ” (Eph 3:8). F. Hauck and W. Kasch, TDNT 6:328. Hauck and Kasch, TDNT 6:328–29. Hauck and Kasch also note the cross references in Rom 2:4 and 2 Cor 8:9 and Rom 11:33. Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 57.25. Sanday and Headlam, Epistle to the Romans, 291. Alan Segal cites Rom 10:9–12 (as well as 1 Cor 1:2) as an example of early Christian believers addressing the risen Jesus in prayer. Segal, “Risen Christ and the Angelic Mediator Figures in Light of Qumran,” 316. Compare this with Matt 18:20 where Jesus says that where two or three are gathered in his name, he is present with them. Psalm 94:9 speaks of YHWH as the one who planted the ear in humans and therefore has the ability hear them, and he consequently knows the thoughts of people. In 2 Chr 7:14, YHWH says that if his people who are called by his name will repent and seek his face, then he will “hear from heaven.” In Mal 1:11, YHWH speaks of incense being offered to his name “in every place.” Incense is used metaphorically to refer to prayer (Ps 141:2; Rev 8:3–4). Contra Bousset, Kyrios Christos. Bousset saw any notion of worship or devotion to Jesus as a product of Hellenistic influences which entered the Gentile churches and which were distinctly separate from the first-century Judean Christian church where such devotion to Jesus was absent. Bousset’s thesis cannot be sustained in light of Rom 10:12 and particularly 1 Cor 16:22, which shows Jewish origins. On the implausibility of Bousset’s thesis, see Capes, Old Testament Yahweh Texts in Paul’s Christology, 9–12, 20–33. For modern

384

187.

188. 189.

190. 191.

192.

193. 194. 195.

196. 197.

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

scholars who concur with Bousset’ theory, see Maurice Casey, From Jewish Prophet to Gentile God: Origins and Development of New Testament Christology (Cambridge: James Clarke; Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1991); Burton L. Mack, A Myth of Innocence: Mark and Christian Origins (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1988), 98–102; Hyam Maccoby, The Mythmaker: Paul and the Invention of Christianity (London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1986). Bauckham, Jesus and the God of Israel, 196; Capes, Old Testament Yahweh Texts in Paul’s Christology, 164–67. On Rom 10:13, see C. Kavin Rowe, “Romans 10:13: What Is the Name of the Lord?” Horizons in Biblical Theology 22 (2000): 135–73. Dodd, Epistle of Paul to the Romans, 169 translates the phrase “Everyone who invokes the name of the Lord shall be saved.” Bauckham, Jesus and the God of Israel, 196 (italics in original). Bauckham goes on to assert here that, “The identifying name YHWH names Jesus as well as God his Father, and in such a way that they are certainly not two gods.” It would seem inconceivable for Paul as a monotheist (1 Cor 8:4–6; Gal 3:20; cf. 1 Tim 2:5) to place Jesus alongside of God as another god. Paul conceives of the risen Jesus as being included within the divine identity not added to the divine identity. Martin similarly notes that early Christians believed that Jesus reigned not as a second god but as one who truly shares full equality and divinity with God. Ralph P. Martin, Carmen Christi: Philippians 2:5–11 in Recent Interpretation and in the Setting of Early Christian Worship (rev. ed.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1983), 274–76. I will examine this further below. Fitzmyer, Romans, 593. Some scholars tend to treat only Rom 10:9–13 and leave verse  14 out. Fitzmyer for instance places Rom 10:14–21 as a new subsection in Paul’s argument. Fitzmyer, Romans, 595. Verse 14 should properly belong to Rom 10:9–13 as it is linguistically tied to vv.  12–13 by the verb evpikale,w. Morris notes that there is a division of opinion on whether vv. 14–15 should be linked with the preceding verses (i.e. Rom 10:9–13). Morris, Epistle to the Romans, 389. Verse 15a, pw/j de. khru,xwsin eva.n mh. avpostalw/sin / “And how are they to proclaim him unless they are sent?” should also be included with Rom 10:9–14 as it is the last of a series of questions raised in v. 14. I have not added v. 15a to the discussion because it is not relevant to this study. See Morris, Epistle to the Romans, 389. See Fitzmyer, Romans, 595; Sanday and Headlam, Epistle to the Romans, 293. Delling surprisingly states regarding Rom 10:14 that only “confession of Christ is meant.” Delling, Worship in the New Testament, 118. This is not sustained by the context (Rom 10:9–13) which cites Joel 2:32 where YHWH is invoked. As we have seen, Paul applies this YHWH text to Jesus, so that calling on the name of YHWH or the Lord = calling upon the name of the Lord Jesus. Cullmann notes that “‘calling upon’ . . . the Kyrios also included praying to him.” Cullmann, Christology of the New Testament, 215. Fitzmyer, Romans, 596. Contra Neyrey who states, “We know of, moreover, confessional acknowledgments of Jesus that are spoken about him but not addressed to him: ‘Jesus is Lord’ (1 Cor 12:3).”

NOTES

198. 199.

200. 201. 202.

| 385

Neyrey, Give God the Glory, 150 (italics in original). While the confession “Jesus is Lord” is a descriptive statement about Jesus as we saw in Rom 10:9, it is the same Lord, however, who is Jesus that is invoked by the Christian worshipping community (Rom 10:13; cf. vv. 12, 14;1 Cor 1:2) and who is identified with YHWH. To invoke as we saw means to call upon, and this would be constitutive of an address by the worshipper. It is interesting that Neyrey does not deal with Rom 10:12–14 in his book, nor is the passage listed in the index. See Neyrey, Give God the Glory, 270. In invoking the risen Jesus as “Lord,” the subject can be said to be making a “confessional” acknowledgment of Jesus as Lord by way of direct address (cf. 1 Cor 16:22). See my discussion in sec. 1.2.1. in chap. 3. Wallace, Basics of New Testament Syntax, 169. An example of this use of the preposition meta, is seen in 1 John 1:3, o] e`wra,kamen kai. avkhko,amen avpagge,llomen kai. u`mi/n i[na kai. u`mei/j koinwni,an e;chte meq h`mw/n kai. h` koinwni,a de. h` h`mete,ra meta. tou/ patro.j kai. meta. tou/ ui`ou/ auvtou/ VIhsou/ Cristou/ / “we announce to you what we have seen and heard in order that you also may have fellowship with us; and indeed our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ.” The writer stresses the two-dimensional aspects in worship, the horizontal and the vertical. He first mentions the fellowship believers have with one another (horizontal aspect) and invites the reader(s) to share in that fellowship “with us” (meq h`mw/n), and secondly, he mentions that the fellowship he has with the believers is “with the Father (meta. tou/ patro.j) and with his Son (meta. tou/ ui`ou/ auvtou) Jesus Christ” (vertical aspect). It should be noted that just as in Paul, 1 John also has what appears to be an objective “binitarian” statement wherein the objects of their fellowship is God (“the Father”) and Jesus Christ (“his Son”). John Stott rightly notes that the fellowship which Christian believers have with one another is predicated on the fellowship that they have with the Father and the Son. John R. W. Stott, The Letters of John: An Introduction and Commentary (Tyndale New Testament Commentaries; Leicester, UK: Inter-Varsity Press; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988), 68. Paul also makes a similar statement in 1 Cor 8:6 where he speaks of believers being in relationship to the one God the Father, and the one Lord Jesus Christ. This point is accepted by most interpreters. See Fee, Pauline Christology, 458n128. That invocation is in view is seen in the NEB, which translates this phrase in 2 Tim 2:22 as “with all who invoke the Lord in singleness of mind.” Luke Timothy Johnson, The First and Second Letters to Timothy: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AB 35A; New York: Doubleday, 2001), 400. An indicator that 2 Tim 2:22 is alluding to Joel 2:32 is seen in the addition of the adjective “all” in some MSS (C G I 048 33 81 104 326 330 436 451 1877 2492 itg syrh copsa, bo mss eth Chrysotomtxt Isidore Theodoret) to the phrase, “those who call on the Lord.” The Pauline passages that allude to Joel 2:32 (Rom10:13; 1 Cor 1:2) contain the word “all” or “everyone” (pa/j) because it is also found in Joel 2:32. In Rom 10:13, Paul directly quotes from Joel 2:32. The MT of Joel 2:32 (MT Joel 3:5) also contains the noun lKo which also carries the meaning of “everyone” and “all.” See BDB, 481–82. The appearance of pa/j in LXX Joel 3:5 and in Rom 10:13 and 1 Cor 1:2 most likely influenced a scribe to harmonize 2 Tim 2:22 with the Joel and Pauline passages. The reading in

386

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

2  Tim 2:22 is admittedly the shorter and harder reading. Johnson, First and Second Letters to Timothy, 400. 203. The rendering of the RSV, “Let every one who names the name of the Lord depart from iniquity” is a more literal reading to the Greek text. The NRSV (and similarly NJB) renders it, “Let everyone who calls on the name of the Lord turn away from wickedness.” The NRSV and NJB translates this phrase as if it was an invocation, which while related to an invocation does not use the technical language of invocation. 204. Fee, Pauline Christology, 456. Fee takes the reference to “foundation” as a “synecdoche” for the temple, which in Pauline language is a metaphor for the church (1 Cor 3:16–17; 2 Cor 6:16; cf. Eph 2:21–22). Isa 28:16 is also cited by Paul in Rom 10:11. 205. Capes only cites Num 16:5 as a known citation in 2 Tim 2:19 and expresses doubt about the origin of the other sayings. Capes, Old Testament Yahweh Texts in Paul’s Christology, 146. 206. Barrett conflates the terms “God” and “Lord” (which the writer of 2 Tim intended to keep separate) when he comments on 2 Tim 2:19. He asserts that, “God also knows those who are truly his.” Barrett, Pastoral Epistles, 107. The writer clearly states that it is “the Lord [Jesus who] knows those who are his.” The christological emphasis is so significant as I noted that the writer altered the LXX reading of Num 16:5 in his quotation and opted for the MT reading because it contained the divine name YHWH, which was carried over into Greek as “Lord.” Bauckham, Jesus and the God of Israel, 219n86. 207. Capes, Old Testament Yahweh Texts in Paul’s Christology, 147. Capes assumes Pauline authorship for 2 Tim. 208. See Capes, Old Testament Yahweh Texts in Paul’s Christology, 149. Also see the comments on this theme in Capes, Old Testament Yahweh Texts in Paul’s Christology, 69–74. 209. There is an interesting linguistic parallel between 2 Tim 2:19 and LXX Lev 24:16 regarding the name of the Lord. Bauckham, Jesus and the God of Israel, 220 notes this parallel but does not comment on it. Fee notes the parallel and comments on it albeit briefly, but he sees the allusion in this case to refer primarily to LXX Isa 26:13, a text I also note below. Fee, Pauline Christology, 457n123. See also Gordon D. Fee, “God’s Sure Foundation: ‘Paul’s Use of Scripture in 2 Timothy” (paper read at a seminar of the Society of Biblical Literature Annual Meeting: Paul and Scripture, New Orleans, Louisiana, 2009): 7. On this page Fee incorrectly refers to 2 Tim 2:19 as 1 Tim 2:19. The parallel is as follows: LXX Lev 24:16, ovnoma,zwn de. to. o;noma kuri,ou qana,tw| qanatou,sqw  / “And he that names the name of the Lord, let him die the death.” 2 Tim 2:19, VAposth,tw avpo. avdiki,aj pa/j o` ovnoma,zwn to. o;noma kuri,ou / “Let every one who names the name of the Lord depart from iniquity.” What should be noted is the linguistic similarity between the two passages. In the Leviticus passage, the name that is named is that of YHWH, and in 2 Tim 2:19 the name that is named is that of the Lord Jesus. The reading in LXX Lev 24:16 differs from that given in the MT of Lev 24:16, tm'Wy tAm hw"hy>-~ve bqenOw> / “One who blasphemes the name of the Lord shall be put to death.” Note as well Sir 23:10, kai. o` ovmnu,wn kai. ovnoma,zwn

NOTES

210. 211.

212.

213. 214.

215.

| 387

dia. panto.j avpo. a`marti,aj ouv mh. kaqarisqh/|  / “so also the person who always swears and utters the Name will never be cleansed from sin.” The LXX version of Lev 24:16 gave rise to the rabbinic prohibition of uttering or pronouncing the name of YHWH as stated in the Mishnah (m. Sanh. 7:5): “The blasphemer is not culpable unless he pronounces the Name itself.” Philo seems to understand the proscription against blasphemy in Lev 24:16 as not pronouncing the name of YHWH per se, but as pronouncing it unreasonably and as an expletive (Philo, Mos. 2:206, 208). It appears that Philo was familiar with the wording in LXX Lev 24:16. The rabbinic notion appears to be later and foreign to the time of Jesus and Paul. Beyer notes that “[t]he formal exposition of the concept by later Rabbinic law, which finds fulfillment of the substance of blasphemy in such things as the clear enunciation of the name of God [m. Sanh. 7:5], is not yet present in the time of Jesus.” H. W. Beyer, TDNT 1:622. The Mishnah itself admits that the name of YHWH was still pronounced by the priests when the Second Temple was still standing (Sotah 38a; Yoma 39b; Tamid 33b). Since the Second Temple was destroyed in 70 CE and Paul had by this time been martyred, it stands to reason that the prohibition against pronouncing the name altogether was not yet fully developed nor in practice. Paul’s death is set at about 65 CE. See F. F. Bruce, “Paul in Acts and Letters,” DPL, 687. Geza Vermes places the death of Paul before the end of Nero’s reign sometime before 68 CE. Geza Vermes, Who’s Who in the Age of Jesus (London: Penguin, 2005), 196. Capes, Old Testament Yahweh Texts in Paul’s Christology, 148. Bietenhard, TDNT 5:282. Thus the rendering of both the NRSV and NJB, which translate this phrase as if it was an invocation. While it is related to an invocation, it does not use the technical language of invocation. The verb can also carry the meaning of “to call out a name.” Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 33.133. Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 33.133. The idea of uttering a name in a ritual context can be related to the Christian rite of baptism where the confession “Jesus is Lord” was most likely uttered by the believer. See Cranfield, Epistle to the Romans, 1:166–67. Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 53.62 (italics mine). Second Timothy 2:19 is cited here as an example of this definition. See LXX Jos 23:7, which says, o[pwj mh. eivse,lqhte eivj ta. e;qnh ta. kataleleimme,na tau/ta kai. ta. ovno,mata tw/n qew/n auvtw/n ouvk ovnomasqh,setai evn u`mi/n ouvde. mh. proskunh,shte auvtoi/j ouvde. mh. latreu,shte auvtoi/j / “that ye go not in among these nations that are left; and the names of their gods shall not be named among you, neither shall ye serve them, neither shall ye bow down to them.” Note the association of naming the names of other gods, serving them and bowing down to them, all of which is reflective of worship. Also see LXX Isa 26:13: ku,rie o` qeo.j h`mw/n kth/sai h`ma/j ku,rie evkto.j sou/ a;llon ouvk oi;damen to. o;noma, sou ovnoma,zomen / “O Lord our God, take possession of us: O Lord, we know not any other beside thee: we name thy name.” Here the exclusive worship of YHWH apart from other gods is indicated by the fact that YHWH’s worshippers name his name. Note the linguistic similarity between LXX Isa 26:13 and 2 Tim 2:19. Longenecker, Studies in Paul, 30. Longenecker admits here that evpikale,w in Paul “appears in prayer contexts.”

388

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

216. Capes, Old Testament Yahweh Texts in Paul’s Christology, 120; Longenecker, Studies in Paul, 30; Hurtado, One God, One Lord, 107; Herrmann, TDNT 2:790; Cullmann, Christology of the New Testament, 215; Dunn, Theology of Paul, 257; Fee, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 33; Bauckham, Jesus and the God of Israel, 129. For an examination of a number of Pauline texts where prayers are addressed to the risen Jesus, see Fee, Pauline Christology, 51–52, 73–77, 194–95, 493–94, 574–76, and 580. 217. Paul does employ the words douleu,w and dou/loj to designate worship to God in some contexts, but these words also have a wide semantic range in that they can refer to service offered to others such as human masters, idols, sin, and so on. 218. Stanley, Boasting in the Lord, 1. 219. Hunter attributes this truncating of worship material in Pauline studies to “on-going scholarly misgivings about the apostolic authorship of 2 Thessalonians, the Prison Letters and the Pastorals.” Hunter, “Prayer,” DPL, 727. Hunter, however, does not explain why this is the case that Pauline worship material is truncated. Even without 2 Thess, the Prison Letters and the Pastorals, the proto-Pauline letters for the sake of argument still offer a substantive amount of information pertinent to worship. 220. Hunter, “Prayer,” DPL, 726. 221. See Cullmann, Prayer in the New Testament, xv. 222. R. Gebauer, Das Gebet bei Paulus (Basel: Brunnen, 1989). 223. G. Harder, Paulus und das Gebet (Gütersloh,1936). 224. Peter T. O’Brien, “Ephesians 1: An Unusual Introduction to a New Testament Letter” NTS 25 (1979): 504–16; O’Brien, Introductory Thanksgivings in the Letters of Paul; O’Brien, “Romans 8:26, 27: A Revolutionary Approach to Prayer?” 65–73; Peter  T. O’Brien, “Thanksgiving and the Gospel in Paul” NTS 21 (1974–1975): 144–55; O’Brien, “Thanksgiving within the Structure of Pauline Theology,” 50–66. 225. Gordon P. Wiles, Paul’s Intercessory Prayers: The Significance of the Intercessory Prayer Passages in the Letters of St. Paul (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1974). 226. BDAG, 878. 227. Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 33.178. 228. Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Dem. 43.66; Diodorus Siculus, Lib. 10.9.8–9; Euripides, Tro. 860; Hymn 16 to Asclepius 16.1; Hymn 5 to Aphrodite 5.218; Lysias, Speeches 25.22; Homer, Il. 11.1.40; Sophocles, Trach. 205; Aeschylus, Ag. 385. 229. Xenophon, Anab. 6.3. 230. Plato, Symp. 220d. 231. Josephus, Ant. 10.252. 232. Josephus, Ant. 10.256. 233. Fee, Paul’s Letter to the Philippians, 409n46. 234. J. B. Lightfoot, Saint Paul’s Epistle to the Philippians: A Revised Text with Introduction, Notes, and Dissertations (London: Macmillan, 1881), 160. 235. Hunter, “Prayer,” DPL, 730. 236. The NT gospels also record the fact that Jesus of Nazareth prayed to God. On this, see Jeremias, Prayers of Jesus; Neyrey, Give God the Glory, 171–78. Paul is aware and also notes that Jesus prayed to God when he deals with the Eucharist in recounting that Jesus gave

NOTES

237. 238. 239.

240.

241. 242. 243. 244.

245. 246. 247. 248. 249. 250. 251. 252. 253.

| 389

thanks to God (1 Cor 11:23–24). I will deal with this text and the subject of the Eucharist below. Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 33.178. Malina, “What Is Prayer?” 215. BDAG, 878. It is also noted here that among the Jews the word proseuch, “is nearly always equivalent to sunagwgh, in the sense of a cultic place.” Louw and Nida also note that proseuch is also used of “a place where people customarily meet to pray—‘a place for prayer.’” Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 33.179. Also see Greeven, TDNT 2:808. Paul never uses proseuch, to designate a place of prayer, nor does Paul use the word sunagwgh,. The only other NT letter that refers to sunagwgh, is Jas 2:2 where James seems to be addressing a Jewish Christian community (cf. Jas 1:1) who meet at a designated place, a sunagwgh,. James Adamson points out that the word sunagwgh in Jas 2:2 has “a more local” connotation. See James B. Adamson, The Epistle of James (NICNT; Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 1976),105–6. In Rev 2:9 and 3:9, sunagwgh, is used in a pejorative sense for the opponents of Christian believers being part of the “synagogue of Satan.” On the “synagogue of Satan,” see Mounce, Book of Revelation, 101–2. There is a similarity to this idea in the Fourth Gospel where place = relationship. The Father and Son make their home with the believer (John 14:23), as Neyrey notes, “where the group is, there is the place of worship.” Neyrey, Give God the Glory, 193, 195. In this sense, “both the person of Jesus and persons of the [Johannine] group become the sacred space” (204). Jesus himself becomes somatically identified with the temple (John 2:18–22). Neyrey, Give God the Glory, 145; Léon-Dufour, Dictionary of the New Testament, 331. Neyrey, Give God the Glory, 246. To use a modern-day example, when a person is ordered to surrender to the police or the military, the physical expression of surrender is usually the raising of the person’s hands. On this graffito item, see Bauckham, Jesus and the God of Israel, 139; Michel, TDNT 5:284n7; E. Dinkler, Signum Crucis: Aufsätze zum Neuen Testament und zur Christlichen Archäologie (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1967), 150–55; R. Travers Herford, Christianity in Talmud and Midrash (London: Williams & Norgate, 1903), 154 n1. Bauckham, Jesus and the God of Israel, 139–40. Bauckham, Jesus and the God of Israel, 139. Michel, TDNT 5:284n7. Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 53.53. See Acts 18:13. Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 53.53. See sec. 7.2. in chap. 4. On seba,zomai, see sec. 3.1. in chap. 4. Aune, “Worship, Early Christian,” ABD 6: 973. Hunter, “Prayer,” DPL, 729. Also see Longenecker, Studies in Paul, 29. Hunter, “Prayer,” DPL, 725; Dunn, Theology of Paul, 48–49. Luke also presents Paul as a man of prayer. After Paul’s encounter with the risen Christ, Ananias is told to search out a man from Tarsus named Saul, “for he is praying” (Acts 9:11). Throughout Acts, Paul is presented as a person who frequently engaged in prayer (Acts 13:2–3; 14:23; 16:25; 20:36; 22:17; 28:8). Longenecker, Studies in Paul, 28. Longenecker views Luke’s

390

254. 255. 256. 257. 258. 259.

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

statements concerning Paul’s prayer life as admittedly second hand and that to get to the heart of the matter one must investigate Paul’s letters. I concur with Longenecker’s position. If anything, Luke’s statements are merely confirmatory of what we find in Paul’s own statements concerning prayer in his letters. A cursory reading of Paul’s letters seem to indicate that prayer was central to Paul’s spiritual life. On Luke’s portrayal of Paul and a comparison with Paul’s own persona in his letters, see F. F. Bruce, “Is the Paul of Acts the Real Paul?” Bulletin of the John Rylands University Library of Manchester 58 (1975–1976): 282–303; Stanley E. Porter, Paul in Acts (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2001). Morris, Epistle to the Romans, 58n118. In Col 4:2, the writer notes that one of Paul’s partners, Epaphras, prayed for the Colossian believers. In the Gospel of Luke, Jesus is also depicted as praying for long periods, such as being in prayer all night (Luke 6:12), a reference unique to the Lukan gospel alone. Fee, Paul’s Letter to the Philippians, 409n46. Neyrey, Give God the Glory, 10. Philo, Spec. Laws 1.224 (italics added; cf. Philo, Planting 135) states: Under the head of the preservation offering is embraced what is called the praiseoffering . . . [the blessed person] has as his bounded duty to requite God . . . with hymns . . . and benedictions . . . and prayers . . . and sacrifices . . . and the other expressions of gratitude . . . as religion demands. All these collected and summed up have obtained a single name of praise.

260. Plato states that “praying is making a request of them [the gods].” Plato, Euthyphr. 14C. He also states that prayer involves “asking [the gods] for good things for us.” Plato, Pol. 290d. 261. Robert Morgenthaler, Statistik des Neutestamentlichen Wortschatzes (Zürich; Frankfurt: Gotthelf, 1958). 262. Morgenthaler’s study and numerical figures is cited in Longenecker, Studies in Paul, 29. 263. By way of comparison, Morgenthaler breaks down the use of prayer words and their appearance in the other NT texts as follows: NT Texts

Number of Prayer Words

Number of Occurrences

Matthew

8

60

Mark

8

32

Luke

10

57

John

3

15

Acts

10

80

Hebrews

7

18

Remainder of NT

59

—

NOTES

264. 265.

266. 267. 268. 269. 270.

271. 272. 273. 274. 275. 276. 277. 278.

279.

| 391

The above figures in Morgenthaler’s study is set out in Longenecker, Studies in Paul, 29. Hunter’s numbering of the same data differs from that of Longenecker. Hunter “Prayer,” DPL, 729–30. Longenecker neglected to mention that even though the occurrence of words for “prayer” occur 133 times in the Pauline corpus, if one takes the occurrence of the words for “prayer” in Luke’s writings, which would include Luke’s Gospel and Acts, one would have a total of 137 occurrences, which would be greater than the occurrences in the Pauline corpus (133). However, the Pauline corpus does contain a greater number of various words for prayer (sixteen) than Luke. Luke uses ten words for prayer both in his gospel and in Acts. Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 33.178. See Longenecker, Studies in Paul, 29–30 who provides the references to these words in the Pauline letters. Longenecker seems to have forgotten two important terms for “prayer” used by Paul in Rom 1:10 and Rom 9:3. In Rom 1:10, the verb de,omai which means “to ask” and to “beg,” but also “spec[ifically], of requests addressed to God; absol[utely] to pray, make supplication.” Thayer, New Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon, 129. In Rom 9:3, Paul uses the word eu;comai, which means “wish” when he desires he were accursed for the sake of his kinspeople Israel. According to Louw and Nida, eu;comai carries two meanings: the first, “to desire something, with the implication of a pious wish—‘to desire, to wish.’” Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 25.6. It also carries the meaning of prayer as seen in 2 Cor 13:7, 9 where the referent is explicitly God. Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 33.178. It is possible that Paul may be using eu;comai as a prayer in Rom 9:3. The NET notes on Rom 9:3 supplies as an alternate reading: “For I would pray” (n. 4). See Sanday and Headlam, Epistle to the Romans, 228 who suggest Paul may have meant by this word “the prayer was in my heart.” Neyrey, Give God the Glory, 12–13. There is a typo on pp. 12–13 where Neyrey repeats the number 7 twice, and he mistakenly lists nine terms instead of ten. Longenecker, Studies in Paul, 30. Longenecker, Studies in Paul, 30. BDAG, 415–16. H. Conzelmann, TDNT 9:412; Neyrey, “Lost in Translation,” 19. The only exception is Galatians where Paul does not mention giving thanks for the community. This appears understandable given Paul’s tone of disappointment with the situation in Galatia. Peter T. O’Brien, “Benediction, Blessing, Doxology, Thanksgiving,” DPL, 69. Conzelmann, TDNT 9:413. See Morris, First Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians, 190–91; Conzelmann, TDNT 9:413. Neyrey, “Lost in Translation,” 2. Neyrey, “Lost in Translation,” 2. Also see p. 22. O’Brien, “Thanksgiving within the Structure of Pauline Theology,” 62. Neyrey, “Lost in Translation,” 4. An example outside of Paul is Rev 4:9 where “thanksgiving” is listed with “glory” and “honor.” In Rev 7:12, “thanksgiving” is listed with “blessing,” “glory,” “wisdom,” “honor,” “power,” and “might.” Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 33.356.

392

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

280. Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 33.470. 281. The variation between “blessed” and “praise” can be seen in 2 Cor 1:3 where most translations render euvloghto,j as “blessed” whereas the NIV and NLT renders it “praise.” The noun euvlogi,a, for instance, is also variously translated “blessing” (KJV, NKJV, ASV, ESV, NASB, NAB, NLT, NRSV, RSV) and “praise” (NIV, NET) in Rev 5:12–13; 7:12. The NJB translates euvlogi,a as “blessing” in Rev 5:12, but then translates the same word as “praise” in Rev 5:13 and 7:12. Also see Tob 12:6 where translations differ on “bless” (NRSV) and “praise” (RSV). 282. Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 33.470. 283. Neyrey, “Lost in Translation,” 18–19; Joachim Jeremias, The Eucharistic Words of Jesus (trans. N. Perrin; London: SCM Press, 1966), 174–78. This seems to be reflected in the texts dealing with the Eucharist (Mark 14:23; Matt 26:27; Luke 22:17, 19; 24:30?; 1 Cor 10:16; 11:24). 284. By “heavenly entity,” I mean a heavenly being such as an angel. 285. John Day, Psalms (London; New York: T&T Clark, 2003), 11–14. 286. See Pss 7, 35, 58–59, 69, 83, 109, 137, 139. On the imprecatory psalms, see E. Zenger, A God of Vengeance? Understanding the Psalms of Divine Wrath (Louisville; Westminster John Knox Press, 1996). 287. Wiles, Paul’s Intercessory Prayers, 6. Luke in both the gospel and Acts, both of which are structured as a letter; Luke 1:1–4; Acts 1:1), does record prayers that are directly addressed to the deity in the second person (Luke 2:28–32; Acts 1:24–25; 4:24–30). The book of Revelation, which is also composed as a letter (Rev 1:4–5), also contains prayers addressed in the second person to both God and the Lamb (Rev 4:11; 5:9–10). 288. First Corinthians 16:22 may be an exception to this, since it contains the maranatha phrase. I will deal with this passage below. 289. Hunter “Prayer,” DPL, 726; Stanley, Boasting in the Lord, 73. 290. In liturgical texts, God is addressed in the second person whereas the worshipper(s) is addressed in the third person. In letters, God is referred to in the third person, and the recipients (worshippers) are referred to in the second person. Longenecker, Studies in Paul, 31–32. 291. Longenecker, Studies in Paul, 31. Longenecker, however, sees an exception on what may be a liturgical text in 1 Cor 16:22 where the maranatha phrase or prayer appears. 292. Wiles, Paul’s Intercessory Prayers, 6–7; Longenecker, Studies in Paul, 31–32. Wiles points out that when Paul wanted to introduce intercessory prayers on behalf of his communities, he would do so by recasting his direct prayers into “wish prayers,” which make mention of God in the third person while still addressing his readers. I will address the subject of “wish prayers” below. 293. Neyrey, Give God the Glory, 146, 246. 294. Neyrey, Give God the Glory, 38. 295. See sec. 1.1. of chap. 3. 296. Note as well how God speaks of gaining or winning glory for himself in judging Pharaoh and Egypt (Exod 14:4; 17–18; Ezek 28:22). Neyrey, Give God the Glory, 42n30. Neyrey

NOTES

297. 298.

299.

300.

301. 302. 303.

304.

305.

| 393

argues that the idea of God gaining or winning glory for himself (Exod 14:4) comes from a social-cultural context wherein henotheism was common where YHWH was in competition with other gods. When monotheism was fully developed, Neyrey feels this notion was abandoned. Neyrey, Give God the Glory, 43n31. This theory is unnecessary. What we may encounter here are anthropomorphisms which were very common in explaining the interaction of God with humans by the biblical writers. Anthropomorphisms account better for such language as God gaining and winning glory to himself. The translation “I will gain glory for myself through Pharaoh and all his army” is better translated “I will be honored because of Pharaoh and all his army,” according to James K. Bruckner, Exodus (New International Bible Commentary; Peabody, MA; Hendrickson, 2008), 129, but the majority of the translations of Exod 14:4 is against him. Moo, Epistle to the Romans, 743; Neyrey, Give God the Glory, 56. Neyrey, Give God the Glory, 42. Neyrey also comments here that “God’s honor is never ascribed, for no one in the universe can be found higher than God to bestow it.” Neyrey is clearly in error here, because the idea of ascribing certain virtues to God is attested in the OT (Deut 32:3; Job 36:3; Ps 68:34). Deuteronomy 32:3 speaks of ascribing greatness to God (see the use of “ascribe” in KJV, NKJV, ASV, ESV, NASB, NRSV, RSV); Job 36:3 speaks of ascribing righteousness to God, and Ps 68:34 speaks of ascribing power or strength to God. In the Hebrew text of Ps 68:34, it literally reads to “give strength to God.” The verb bh;y" in Deut 32:3 means among other definitions “to ascribe.” BDB, 396. The same verb and meaning appears in Ps 29:1–2; 96:7–8. Greeven, TDNT 2:805. On the various postures and gestures of prayer in the NT such as standing, kneeling, prostrating, or upraised hands, see Léon-Dufour, Dictionary of the New Testament, 330–31. On Rom 11:4, see Moo, Epistle to the Romans, 676; Dodd, Epistle of Paul to the Romans,174–75; Sanday and Headlam, Epistle to the Romans, 311–12; Dunn, Theology of Paul, 521. Loh and Nida. Translator’s Handbook on Paul’s Letter to the Philippians, 63. O’Brien, Epistle to the Philippians, 240–41. On the lifting up of the hands being associated with addressing God, see Ps 28:2; 63:4; 119:48; 141:2; Lam 2:19; 3:41. Another expression or gesture associated with prayer is that of stretching or spreading out the hands before God (1 Kgs 8:22; Ps 88:10; 143:6; Isa 1:15; 2 Macc 14:34). Barrett, Pastoral Epistles, 53. On the same page, Barrett supplies a third-century detail from a Christian sarcophagus showing a praying figure with uplifted hands. See also Benjamin Fiore, The Pastoral Epistles: First Timothy, Second Timothy, Titus (ed. Daniel J. Harrington; SP  12; Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2007), 64; Towner, Letters to Timothy and Titus, 201–4. Josephus also mentions the lifting of the hands in prayer. Josephus, Ant. 4.40. Donald Guthrie notes that“the phrase [“in every place”] is typically Pauline (cf. 1 Cor 1:2; 2 Cor 2:14; 1 Thess 1:8).” Donald Guthrie, The Pastoral Epistles: An Introduction and Commentary (Tyndale New Testament Commentaries; Leicester, UK: Inter-Varsity Press; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990), 84.

394

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

306. Walter Lock, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Pastoral Epistles (ICC; Edinburgh; T&T Clark, 1924), 30. 307. See sec. 1.2.3. of chap. 3. 308. avqw/|oj cersi.n; LXX Ps 23:4 / ~yIP;k; yqin>; MT Ps 24:4. 309. Vincent, Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament. Also at http://biblecommenter. com/1_timothy/2–8.htm (accessed 27 December 2010). 310. Jeremias, TDNT 1:186. 311. Even in a modern sense when people raise their hands, this posture usually represents a sign of surrender. This often takes place in a military context with the capture of prisoners of war or in a legal context when the police apprehend suspects. 312. Cross, Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, 1096. 313. The NRSV and RSV has this passage as Rom 1:9. 314. See sec. 1.1.1. of chap. 4. 315. Thayer, New Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon, 129. The noun de,hsij is a derivative of de,omai and means “‘request, plea, prayer.’” Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 33.171. Morris notes that de,hsij is “another noun for prayer.” Morris, Epistle to the Romans, 58n118. Also see Longenecker, Studies in Paul, 29–30. 316. Longenecker, Studies in Paul, 30. 317. Morris, Epistle to the Romans, 58. The one exception is in 1 Thess 3:6. 318. O’Brien, Introductory Thanksgivings in the Letters of Paul, 214. It does not mean “without intermission.” Morris, Epistle to the Romans, 58n114. 319. The other places where this adverb appears is in 1 Thess 1:2; 2:13; 5:17. See Moo, Epistle to the Romans, 59n26. 320. Dodd notes that the phrase tw/| qelh,mati tou/ qeou literally means “God willing.” Dodd, Epistle of Paul to the Romans, 7. The NLT translates the phrase as “God willing.” 321. Sanday and Headlam note that “St. Paul has a special reason for laying stress on the fact that all his movements are in the hands of God.” Sanday and Headlam, Epistle to the Romans, 21. 322. The RSV omits the phrase “night and day” in 2 Tim 1:3. This omission weakens the force of the writer’s emphasis on his constant prayers for Timothy. The RSV takes the phrase “night and day” to be part of 2 Tim 1:4. The NRSV has restored the phrase to 2 Tim 1:3. 323. A. T. Hanson notes that 2 Tim 1:3 “seems to be modeled on Rom 1:9.” Anthony Tyrrell Hanson, The Pastoral Letters (Cambridge Bible Commentary on the New English Bible; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1966), 77. 324. Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 33.350. 325. While God is the referent to whom thanks is given in 2 Tim 1:3, it is interesting to note that in 1 Tim 1:12 the referent of thanks is the risen Jesus: Ca,rin e;cw tw/| evndunamw,santi, me Cristw/| VIhsou/ tw/| kuri,w| h`mw/n o[ti pisto,n me h`gh,sato qe,menoj eivj diakoni,an / “I thank him who has given me strength, Christ Jesus our Lord, because he judged me faithful, appointing me to his service” (ESV). Here we see that the risen Jesus was also a recipient of thanks in the Pastoral Letters. 326. Longenecker, Studies in Paul, 29–30.

NOTES

| 395

327. Barrett, Pastoral Epistles, 92; Guthrie, Pastoral Epistles, 136. Both Barrett and Guthrie note that the phrase “night and day” can be syntactically connected to 2 Tim 1:4 where the writer longs to see Timothy, hence the RSV reading, “I long night and day to see you.” Most translations favor linking the phrase with the constant prayers offered up on behalf of Timothy in 2 Tim 1:3. 328. Collins, 1 & 2 Timothy and Titus, 191. 329. Fee only lists “three words for prayer” and includes “thanksgiving” afterwards. Fee, Paul’s Letter to the Philippians, 409. Stanley mentions only “three nouns here [that] designate prayer.” Stanley, Boasting in the Lord, 107. But see Silva, Philippians, 195 who correctly notes that Paul uses four words here for “prayer.” 330. Silva, Philippians, 195. 331. Silva recognizes for instance that proseuch, and de,hsij function so closely as synonyms that “we should not look for any significant semantic distinction between proseuch, and de,hsij in this context.” Silva, Philippians, 199. 332. O’Brien, Epistle to the Philippians, 492. O’Brien lists the synonyms here as three and adds that euvcaristi,a is used with a prepositional phrase “with thanksgiving.” Silva, however, sees the synonyms as four. Silva, Philippians, 195. 333. Silva, Philippians, 195. 334. See Longenecker, Studies in Paul, 29–30. 335. O’Brien, Epistle to the Philippians, 493. O’Brien notes here that the prepositional accusative phrase is more graphic than the dative tw/| qew/|. Also see Fee, Paul’s Letter to the Philippians, 409n45. 336. Vincent, Epistles to the Philippians and Philemon, 135. Vincent also refers us here, as an example of the construction pro.j to.n qeo,n in Phil 4:6, to John 1:1, o` lo,goj h=n pro.j to.n qeo,n / “the Word was with God.” The relational aspect between the Word and God is seen here. Westcott comments regarding this construction in John 1:1, “The personal being of the Word was [realized] in active intercourse with and in perfect communion with God.” Westcott, Gospel According to St. John, 3. Morris notes, “Probably we should understand from the preposition the two ideas of accompaniment and relationship.” Morris, Gospel According to John, 67. M. Dods notes that, “Pro,j . . . means more than meta, or para,, and is regularly employed in expressing the presence of one person with another.” Marcus Dods, “The Gospel of St. John,” in The Expositor’s Greek Testament (ed. W. Robertson Nicoll; London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1897), 1:684. 337. A. T. Robertson, A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research (Nashville: Broadman, 1934), 623. 338. Vincent seems to press the point too far when he states that Paul calls on the Philippians to make their requests known to God, “[a]s if God did not know them.” Vincent, Epistles to the Philippians and Philemon, 135. This may be a use of anthropomorphism on the part of Paul, but most likely it is Paul’s simple encouragement for the Philippians to pray more often as he did (Rom 1:9–10). O’Brien raises this question as well but also concludes that Paul does not imply God “is unaware of either the petitions or their content.” Rather, the call is for the Philippians to lay all their cares before God. O’Brien, Epistle to the Philippians, 493. Also see Fee, Paul’s Letter to the Philippians, 409n44. If Paul is echoing

396

339. 340. 341.

342.

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

the teaching of Jesus not to be anxious about anything because God already knows what his worshippers need (Matt 6:32), then it is highly doubtful Paul would think God did not know the prayers and petitions of his worshippers. Fee is of the conviction that Paul “borrows from the Jesus tradition” when he admonishes the Philippians not to be anxious about anything. Fee, Paul’s Letter to the Philippians, 407; 407n40. Also see Stanley, Boasting in the Lord, 106. Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 33.171. Longenecker, Studies in Paul, 30. Longenecker admits here that evpikale,w in Paul “appears in prayer contexts.” Although Martin Hengel does not address the relationship of the risen Jesus to Christian worship as I have set out to do, Hengel nonetheless rightfully queries, “The basic question of New Testament Christology is: How did it come about that in the short space of twenty years the crucified Galilean Jew, Jesus of Nazareth, was elevated by his followers to a dignity which left every possible form of pagan-polytheistic apotheosis far behind?” Hengel, Studies in Early Christology, 383. Hurtado also notes that “devotion to Jesus as divine erupted suddenly and quickly, not gradually and late, among first-century circles of followers.” Hurtado, Lord Jesus Christ, 650. Bauckham, Jesus and the God of Israel, 128 (italics mine). See also later NT texts such as Acts 1:24; 7:59–60; 13:2 where we have instances where the risen Jesus appears to be the referent of prayer in the early church. Prayer to Jesus also appears to be evident in the Fourth Gospel in John 14:14 where Jesus states: eva,n ti aivth,shte, ÎmeÐ evn tw/| ovno,mati, mou tou/to, poih,sw  / “if you ask anything in my name, I will do it” (RSV). Westcott, Gospel According to St. John, 205 comments, “This reading gives a fresh and important thought. Prayer is to be made not only in the name of Christ, as pleading His office in union with Him; but also to Christ” (italics in original). Also see comments in Colin G. Kruse, The Gospel According to John: An Introduction and Commentary (Tyndale New Testament Commentaries; Leicester, UK: Inter-Varsity Press, 2003; Grand Rapids; Cambridge, UK: Eerdmans, 2004), 302–3; Morris, Gospel According to John, 574–75. Metzger, Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, 208 notes that John 14:14 is absent in some MSS but is nevertheless deemed authentic, and he and the committee gave it an {A} rating. He comments regarding its omission in some MSS that, “(a) it was due to an accident in transcription, the eye of the scribe having passed from [ean] to [ean]; (b) similarity in sentiment and even in expression with the first part of ver. 13 prompted parsimonious scribes to delete; (c) it was deliberately omitted in order to avoid contradiction with 16.23.” See also comments in Marsh, Saint John, 511. The pronoun me is also absent in some MSS and attested in others. Metzger, Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, 208 comments, Either the unusual collocation, “ask me in my name,” or a desire to avoid contradiction with 16.23 seems to have prompted (a) the omission of me in a variety of witnesses (A D K L P Y Byz al) or (b) its replacement with to.n pate,ra (249 397). The word me is adequately supported (î66 a B W D Q ¦13 28 33 700 al) and seems to be appropriate in view of its correlation with evgw, later in the verse.

NOTES

| 397

343. Cullmann, Christology of the New Testament, 215 (italics in original). It is particularly interesting that Origen objected to prayer to Jesus. He writes, “We should not pray to anyone begotten, not even to Christ himself, but only to God the Father of us all.” (Origen, Or. 15.1). Origen, however, seems to be inconsistent, for earlier he had asserted that “supplication, intercession, and thanksgiving” (Or. 14.6) could be given to saints as well as to God. One of the reasons for this, according to Neyrey, is that Origen sees prayer as essentially “praise.” Here Origen also reduces prayer to one item: praise (Or. 14.2). See Neyrey, Give God the Glory, 13–14. Origen’s position on offering supplications, intercessions, and thanksgiving to saints would have most likely been rejected by Paul who saw only God and the risen Jesus as the rightful recipients of supplication, intercession, and thanksgiving in the context of worship. 344. Some translations retain the Aramaic rendering maranatha (KJV, ASV, NASB, NJB). 345. Paul uses avna,qema a total of five times in his letters (Rom 9:3; 1 Cor 12:2; 16:22; Gal 1:8–9 [2x]) and always in a negative connotation. What is also significant is that in these avna,qema passages, the context always invariably has to do with Jesus. In Rom 9:3, Paul wishes he were avna,qema for the sake of the salvation of his people, the Israelites; in 1 Cor 12:3 the avna,qema is related to Jesus as spoken by one who does not have the Holy Spirit; in 1 Cor 16:22 the avna,qema is leveled against those who do not love Jesus; and in Gal 1:8–9 the avna,qema is applied to those who distort and change the gospel of Christ. Thus, all the appearances of the avna,qema in Paul, while negative in their connotation, are nevertheless christological in nature and context. 346. That the “Lord” here is Jesus is seen in the Majority Text reading of 1 Cor 16:22: ei; tij ouv filei/ to.n ku,rion VIhsou/n Xristo,n / “If anyone does not love the Lord Jesus Christ.” This reading is reflected in the KJV and NKJV. The shorter reading is clearly original and has greater MS support. 347. Fee, Pauline Christology, 121. 348. Fee notes that Paul makes the interchange between loving God and loving the risen Christ because “the Corinthians by attitude and action are subordinating him [Christ] to a much lesser role.” Fee, Pauline Christology, 121. 349. Paul has just completed an exhaustive and detailed treatment on the resurrection of Jesus, and by extension the resurrection of believers in 1 Cor 15. Paul also deals with the eschatological lordship of the risen Jesus in 1 Cor 15:24–28. Is it possible that the antagonists who are the target of Paul’s polemical defense of the resurrection in 1 Cor 15 are the same as those who do not love the Lord and upon whom Paul pronounces the avna,qema? 350. This verb only appears here in Paul. Elsewhere it appears in the Pastorals in Titus 3:15. Fee, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 837n25. 351. The language in 1 Cor 16:22 of loving the Lord and that of avna,qema, or a curse, belongs to covenantal terminology such as that found in Deut 28 where there are blessings for obedience and curses for disobedience. Thiselton, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 1351. It is instructive to note that in the Decalogue (Exod 20:5–6), YHWH speaks of those who disobey his commands as ya'n>f{l.  / “those who hate me” (MT); toi/j misou/si,n me / “them that hate me” (LXX). On the other hand, YHWH speaks of those who obey him

398

352. 353.

354.

355.

356. 357.

358.

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

as yt'wOc.mi yrEm.vol.W yb;h]aol. / “those who love me and keep my commandments” (MT); toi/j avgapw/si,n me / “them that love me” (LXX). Fidelity again is marked by faithful obedience. Thiselton, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 1351. Also LXX Deut 11:1, which says, kai. avgaph,seij ku,rion to.n qeo,n / “And you shall love the Lord your God.” Also Josh 23:11. Deuteronomy 6:5 is quoted by Jesus in the Gospels (Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27; cf. John 21:17 where Simon Peter affirms after the third time that he loves [file,w] the Lord Jesus). The use of file,w also appears in Titus 3:15. Some scholars have tried to place the maranatha phrase within a Eucharist context, particularly because of its appearance in Did. 10:6 in relation to the Eucharist. I will not address this topic as it is our conviction that Paul does not directly link the maranatha phrase with the Eucharist as the Didache later does. Fitzmyer cautions the temptation to make a quick connection between 1 Cor 16:22 and Did. 10:6. He states, “I hesitate to find the ending of 1 Corinthians reflecting a similar eucharistic situation.” Joseph A. Fitzmyer, To Advance the Gosepl: New Testament Studies (2nd ed.; Grand Rapids; Cambridge, UK: Eerdmans; Livonia: Dove, 1998), 228. On the subject of the relation of the maranatha phrase and the Eucharist, see Geoffrey Wainwright, Eucharist and Eschatology (2nd ed.; London: Epworth Press, 1978). As I noted above, Jesus himself regarded the commands to first love God with all of one’s being (Deut 6:5), and secondly, to love one’s neighbor as oneself (Lev 19:18), as the ultimate expression of devotion to God. Acording to Matt 22:36–40, the fulfillment of the entirety of all the law and the prophets hang on these two commands or are summed up in them. Witherington, “Christology,” DPL, 101. As held by R. H. Fuller, The Foundations of New Testament Christology (London: Lutterworth Press, 1965), 157. Fee suggests that the anathema found in 1  Cor 12:3 stands in “stark contrast to the confession of Jesus as Lord.” Fee, Pauline Christology, 121. If this is the case, then those who uttered the curse anathema Jesus (1 Cor 12:3) are the ones who now are anathema, according to Paul in 1 Cor 16:22, for their absence of love for the Lord. Fee also notes here that the anathemas in 1 Cor 12:3 and 16:22 “focus on a possible attitude towards the lordship of Christ in this early Christian community” (ibid. 121). The idea that the language in 1 Cor 16:22 may imply a deliberate segregation of those who hate the Lord from those who love the Lord has been suggested in the theory that what may be present here is a “ban formula” intended to exclude certain people (those who do not love the Lord) from the Eucharist. Fee, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 837. Fee, however, has shown here that such a conclusion is unwarranted as it involves “several leaps with the evidence.” The appearance of an Aramaic word in a document like 1 Cor addressed to a Greek community has obviously not escaped the notice of scholarship. Joseph Fitzmyer comments that “[i]t is preserved for us, first of all, by Paul and, strangely enough, in the most Greek of his letters, 1 Corinthians (16:22).” Fitzmyer, To Advance the Gospel, 223. The Aramaic phrase Marana tha was obviously an important loan word that enjoyed a wide range of

NOTES

359. 360. 361.

362. 363.

364. 365. 366.

| 399

circulation in Christian communities outside of the Aramaic base community. Its appearance in Paul’s letter to the Corinthians demonstrates how far it had gone geographically. The word syntax in Aramaic would be /š:™ 1š =š or /š:™ 0“=š; see Kuhn, TDNT 4:466. The word syntax in Aramaic would be in this case /š:™ 0”=š Fitzmyer has listed eight different ways the phrase can be translated. Fitzmyer, To Advance the Gospel, 226. Fitzmyer with the majority of scholars favors the imperatival interpretation, “Our Lord, come!” Fitzmyer, To Advance the Gospel, 228. Also see Thiselton, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 1348–53; Robertson and Plummer, First Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians, 401; Morris, First Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians, 243–44; Marshall, Origins of New Testament Christology, 101–2; Fee, Pauline Christology, 120–22; Hurtado, Lord Jesus Christ, 140–42. Conzelmann says the future “Our Lord will come” as a translation of maranatha is “impossible.” Cozelmann quoted in Morris, First Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians, 243–44. Ziesler while agreeing with the majority of scholars that the risen Jesus is the addressee of this marantha prayer argues, “Invocation of a future Lord implies the acclamation of a present one . . . . For [Paul], Christ is both present and future Lord.” Ziesler, Pauline Christianity, 37–38. Marshall, Origins of New Testament Christology, 101. For a thorough discussion on the linguistic reconstruction of maranatha, see Kuhn, TDNT 4:466–72. Fitzmyer, To Advance the Gospel, 224. The writing style of the uncials or majuscules MSS of the NT render this Aramaic phrase as one word; the problem is due to the custom in these MSS of scriptio continua. See also Thiselton, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 1347. Fee, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 838. Morris, First Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians, 243. Morris also notes here that Chrysostom held to the passive interpretation as indicating belief in the incarnation. The word arem is used in the OT book of Daniel. A significant part of Daniel in the MT is written in Aramaic (Dan 2:4b–7:28), and Daniel also appears in the LXX. This provides an opportunity to compare the Aramaic portion of Daniel with the Greek parallels of LXX Daniel. R. H. Fuller has argued that mari does not connote divinity but is rather recognition of human authority. Fuller, Foundations of New Testament Christology, 50. Furthermore, Fuller argues here that it would not “have been natural for Palestinian [Judean] Jewish Christians to use [adon] or [adonai] in application to Jesus. Hence their use of mar, mari, or maran (our Lord), -cf. marana tha (Ibid).” Fuller’s arguments seem to be confused and do not appear to be substantiated by the textual evidence as Kuhn has shown. The Hebrew term !Ada' or ynIdoa] in the MT was translated in the LXX as ku,rioj as in Dan 9:7, for instance. The Aramaic term arem' appears in Dan 2:47 and 5:23 where both times it used of God. Fitzmyer also argues that “there was an incipient custom among both Semitic- and Greek-speaking Jews of Palestine [Judea] to call Yahweh [adon], [mare], or [kyrios].” Fitzmyer, To Advance the Gospel, 222. This Aramaic ascription for God in Daniel is earlier than the NT since it appears in the OT and thus arem' as a divine title for God is pre-Christian. The OT book of Daniel is generally dated to the midsecond century BCE (ca. 165 BCE) during the Maccabean revolt. It is also attested in the Dead Sea Scrolls by eight MSS. The Hebrew-Aramaic text of Daniel is also attested in Qumran as well in the same structure as that of the MT where the transition between

400

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

Hebrew and Aramaic occur. Vermes, Complete Dead Sea Scrolls in English, 11; Martin Abegg Jr., Peter Flint, and Eugene Ulrich, The Dead Sea Scrolls Bible: The Oldest Known Bible Translated for the First into English (New York: Harper SanFrancisco, 1999), 482, 484. Abegg, Flint, and Ulrich place the dating of the Dead Sea Scrolls that contain Daniel in the BCE period and further argue that the bilingual composition of Daniel in Hebrew and Aramaic that appears in the Dead Sea Scrolls is traceable “in this form very early on and thus was most likely compiled in Hebrew and Aramaic . . . . [Daniel] was written at a time when Aramaic was widely spoken by Jews in Palestine [Judea].” Abegg, Flint, and Ulrich, Dead Sea Scrolls Bible, 483. The early Aramaic-speaking Christians appear to have adopted and applied this divine title and apply it to Jesus in much the same way the Hellenistic Jews and Paul himself adopted and applied the Greek title ku,rioj for God in the LXX to Jesus. The discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls in Qumran has submitted evidence that arem' was used as a title for God. Marshall, Origins of New Testament Christology, 99, 108n7. arem' is also found in 1QapGen and 11QtgJob. Segal, “Risen Christ and the Angelic Mediator Figures in Light of Qumran,” 304 comments, “Qumran evidences the use of the term ‘Lord’ (mr’) for YHWH, the Tetragrammaton. This suggests that the origin of the church’s use of the term ‘Lord’ for ‘Christ’ is not to be found in the Hellenistic environment [contra Bousset and Bultmann] but in the original Hebrew ‘church’, as it was a feature of Jewish sectarianism before Christianity.” In LXX Dan 2:47 and 5:23 (Theodotion), arem' is translated as ku,rioj. The Aramaic term arem' thus becomes the equivalent of the Hebrew !Ada', which was in turn the equivalent of the Greek ku,rioj. Fuller’s argument thus appears to be unsubstantiated. The “Palestinian [Judean] Jewish Christians” would have used the equivalent of !Ada' or ynIdoa] when they employed the Aramaic arem' for the risen Jesus. Like ku,rioj, which can refer to both God and humans, arem' also functions the same way as we have seen above in referring to God but also to humans in Dan 4:19, 24 (v. 16 and v. 21 in MT). Thus the Aramaic term arem' was applicable to both divine and revered humans. Ziesler, Pauline Christianity, 38. Contra Fuller, it can connote divinity when applied to God. In his discussion, Fuller never addressed the OT Aramaic passages in Daniel which shed some light on the meaning of arem'. 367. Bultmann argued that the original addressee in 1  Cor 16:22 was God the Father, “Der Eschatologische Gebetsruf [mara atha].” Rudolf Bultmann, Theologie des Neuen Testaments (5th ed.; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1965), 54–55. Butlmann’s position is highly unlikely as the early Christians were awaiting the parousia of the risen Lord Jesus not God the Father. This also ignores the importance of the title “Lord” for the risen Jesus (e.g., 1 Cor 8:6). See Capes, Old Testament Yahweh Texts in Paul’s Christology, 44. 368. Marshall, Origins of New Testament Christology, 101; Delling, Worship in the New Testament, 69–70; Kuhn, TDNT 4:469–71; Capes, Old Testament Yahweh Texts in Paul’s Christology, 43–47; Bauckham, Jesus and the God of Israel, 128; Fee, Pauline Christology, 120–22; A.  J.  E. Rawlinson, The New Testament Doctrine of the Christ (New York: Longmans, Green, 1926), 234–37. Dunn, Theology of Paul, 248n66. Dunn makes the point here that the Aramaic maranatha in the Greek-speaking churches is the “Achilles’ heel” (borrowing Rawlinson’s quote) of Bousset’s thesis (Kyrios Christos), and followed by

NOTES

369.

370.

371.

372.

373.

374.

375. 376. 377. 378. 379. 380.

| 401

Bultmann, Theology of the New Testament, 1:124–25, that the title “Lord” for Jesus only came into usage in the Hellenistic churches. On a very well argued response to Bousset and Bultmann, see Marshall, Origins of New Testament Christology, 24–29, 32–39. Magnus Zetterholm notes that the maranatha prayer certainly predates Paul and that its “original setting was confined to the context of worship.” Magnus Zetterholm, ed., The Messiah in Early Judaism and Christianity (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2007), 39. Paul may have very well taught this Aramaic prayer to the Corinthians. A thought to consider is the possibility that it may have come through the influence of Cephas/Peter, who was well known in the Corinthian community as Paul makes allusions to him in 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22; 9:5; 15:5. Paul refers to him by his Aramaic name Khfa/j in his correspondence with the Corinthians and never by his Greek name Pe,troj. Is it possible the Corinthians learned the maranatha prayer directly from Cephas or through one of his emissaries? Other non-Greek words which Paul introduced to his faith communities include the Aramaic Abba (Rom 8:15; Gal 4:6) and the Hebrew amen (Rom 1:25; 9:5; 11:36; 15:33; 16:27; 1 Cor 14:16; 2 Cor 1:20; Gal 1:5; 6:18; Phil 4:20). This is indicated in the gospel tradition which is attested for instance in Mark 14:36 where Jesus prays in Gethsemane and uses both the Aramaic, and Greek terms, Abba o` path,r for “father” in address to God. Paul is also familiar with these terms as he uses the exact same wording Abba o` path,r in Rom 8:15 and Gal 4:4. This Aramaic term had an enduring significance for the early Christians so much so that Paul retained it, although it has been translated into Greek. Its source undoubtedly goes back to Jesus. See Dunn, Theology of Paul, 192–93; Borchert, Worship in the New Testament, 93; Fitzmyer, According to Paul, 52–53. For other Aramaic words used by Jesus in the Markan gospel, see Mark 5:41; 7:34; 11:9; 15:34. For Aramaic words in the other gospels, see Matt 5:22; 6:24; 27:6; Luke 16:9–13; John 20:16. Contra Bousset, Kyrios Christos, and Bultmann, Theology of the New Testament, 1:124–25. See Marshall, Origins of New Testament Christology, 24–29, 32–39. On Bousset’s position, see comments by Kuhn, TDNT 4:470–71. Schweitzer noted that Paul had more in common with Jesus and the primitive church and that the “Hellenization of Christianity as a process” was something that was “wholly subsequent to Paul.” See R. B. Matlock, Unveiling the Apocalyptic Paul: Paul’s Interpreters and the Rhetoric of Criticism (JSNTSup 127; Sheffield, UK: Sheffield Academic Press, 1996), 24–25. David E. Aune, The Cultic Setting of Realized Eschatology in Early Christianity (NovTSup 28; Leiden: Brill, 1972), 5. Also see Bauckham, “Jesus, Worship of,” in ABD 3:812–19; Martin, “Aspects of Worship in the New Testament Church,” 16. Fee, First Epistle to the Corinthian, 838. Fee, First Epistle to the Corinthian, 838. Fee, Pauline Christology, 576. Moule, Worship in the New Testament, 71. Hengel, Studies in Early Christology, 152. Martin, Worship in the Early Chirch, 32. See also A. Hamman, La prière (Tournai, Desclée, 1959), 276.

402

381. 382. 383. 384. 385. 386. 387. 388. 389.

390. 391.

392.

393. 394. 395. 396.

397. 398. 399.

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

Martin, Worship in the Early Church, 32. Dunn, Theology of Paul, 258. Martin, “Some Reflections on New Testament Hymns,” 41. Martin, “Some Reflections on New Testament Hymns,” 40. Cullmann, Christology of the New Testament, 214. Cullmann calls it a “(liturgical) prayer to Christ.” Cullmann, Prayer in the New Testament, 86. Aune, “Worship, Early Christian,” ABD 6:981. Kuhn, TDNT 4:470. Witherington, “Christology,” DPL, 101. Segal, “Risen Christ and the Angelic Mediator Figures in Light of Qumran,” 316–17. What should be noted here is that Segal recognizes that prayers that were given to the risen Jesus were given to him “along with God,” thus showing that both God and the risen Jesus were conjointly viewed as the recipients of prayer and therefore of worship. Hurtado, Lord Jesus Christ, 173. Raymond E. Brown, An Introduction to New Testament Christology (New York: Paulist Press, 1994), 111; Brown, Introduction to the New Testament, 526; Martin, “Aspects of Worship in the New Testament Church,” 16; Fee, First Epistle to the Corinthian, 838; Fee, Pauline Christology, 576; Ziesler, Pauline Christianity, 37; Moule, Worship in the New Testament, 71; Hengel, Studies in Early Christology, 152; Hamman, La prière, 276; Fuller, Foundations of New Testament Christology, 158; Bowman and Komoszewski, Putting Jesus in His Place, 165; and J. Behm, TDNT 1:438. Thiselton, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 1350, 1352. What tends to be neglected is that the maranatha prayer in which the Lord Jesus is implored to come is modeled after the OT invocations which call on YHWH / ໵࿱‫ݰ‬Ԇ‫( ߥڗ‬LXX) to come and rescue, deliver, and help the supplicate(s). Hurtado has argued on the research of various scholars who have seen in the maranatha prayer of 1 Cor 16:22 a direct allusion to the role that was usually attributed to God or YHWH in Jewish eschatological expectation. Hurtado, At the Origins of Christian Worship, 77. Texts such as Zech 14:5 and 1 En. 1:9 come from an apocalyptic genre which have YHWH or God as the one who is expected to come and make all things right. In Paul, the maranatha prayer has the risen Jesus taking this role typically attributed to YHWH. See Ziesler, Pauline Christianity, 37; Hurtado, Lord Jesus Christ, 141n144. Kuhn, TDNT 4:471. Fee, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 838n32. See also Thiselton, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 1352; Hengel, Studies in Early Christology, 378. Cullmann notes, “It is, then, probably a prayer and not a confession.” Cullmann, Earliest Christian Confessions, 56. See also Bauckham, Theology of the Book of Revelation, 117– 18; Ian Boxall, The Revelation of Saint John (Black’s New Testament Commentaries; Peabody, MA: Hendrickson; London: Continuum, 2006), 318; Hurtado, Lord Jesus Christ, 173 who calls it a “prayer-appeal.” Ziesler, Pauline Christianity, 37–38. Fuller, Foundations of New Testament Christology, 158. Fuller, Foundations of New Testament Christology, 158.

NOTES

| 403

400. The absence of these important and significant Pauline passages are evident in Fuller, Foundations of New Testament Christology, 264. Fuller never addresses these important texts in his book. 401. Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 85.25 notes that one of the meanings of parousia is “the presence of an object at a particular place—‘presence, being at hand, to be in person.’” 402. Bauckham, “Jesus, Worship of” in ABD 3:813. The same can be said here, particularly of Paul’s own personal devotional prayers. 403. Frank J. Matera, II  Corinthians: A Commentary (New Testament Library; Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2003), 277; M.  E. Thrall, 2  Corinthians 8–13 (ICC; London: T&T Clark, 2004), 774–75; Plummer, Second Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians, 336. Hurtado, Lord Jesus Christ, 150–51 remarks: “The ‘Lord’ here is clearly Jesus.” 404. There is an interesting parallel here to Jacob’s “heavenly” experience when he wrestled the angel and as a result and following this ordeal he suffered a physical disability in his walking in that he limped for the rest of his life (Gen 32:25). Paul likewise after his heavenly encounter continued to suffer with the thorn in the flesh, which as far as we know was never healed. 405. The identity of exactly what Paul’s “thorn in the flesh” was remains a debatable issue among scholars. A number of speculations have been offered in identifying the “thorn in the flesh” with the antagonism of an enemy, an eye disease, epilepsy, fever, or hysteria. There is no absolute consensus on this. On the “thorn in the flesh,” see Barnett, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 568–70; Stanley, Boasting in the Lord, 55; Matera, Galatians, 164–65; Richard  J. Bauckham, “Weakness—Paul’s and Ours,” Themelios 7.3 (1982): 4–6; David Alan Black, “Paulus Infirmus: The Pauline Concept of Weakness,” Grace Theological Journal 5.1 (1984): 77–93; Barclay, Letters to the Corinthians, 287–89; Ronald Russell, “Redemptive Suffering and Paul’s Thorn in the Flesh,” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 39.4 (1996): 559–70; Daniel L. Akin, “Triumphalism, Suffering, and Spiritual Maturity: An Exposition of 2 Corinthians 12:1–10 in Its Literary, Theological, and Historical Context,” Criswell Theological Review 4.1 (1989): 116–44. Also see Harris, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, who sees the “thorn in the flesh” as a possible reference to three areas: (1) spiritual or physical anxiety, (2) opposition to Paul, or (3) a physical malady (eye disease?). The common English expression that a person is a “pain in the neck” probably comes closest to what Paul is saying metaphorically. The expressions “barb in the eye” or a “thorn in the side” (Num 13:55; Josh 23:13; Judg 2:3; Ezek 28:24) seem to capture the same metaphorical idea. See Linda L. Belleville, 2 Corinthians (IVP New Testament Commentary Series, ed. Grant R. Osborne; Downers Grove, IL; Nottingham: InterVarsity Press, 1996), 305. It is also possible, according to Harris’s point 2 above and Belleville (305), that Paul may have had in mind troublesome “Jews” who opposed him. David Abernathy is of the opinion that the “thorn in the flesh” was a “literal demon” who harassed Paul. David A. Abernathy, “Paul’s Thorn in the Flesh: A Messenger of Satan?” Neotestamentica 35.1–2: 69–80. 406. Stanley makes the interesting suggestion that the phrase “three times,” while probably implying Paul’s perseverance in prayer, can also be a plausible “reminiscence” of

404

407.

408.

409.

410. 411. 412. 413.

414. 415. 416.

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

the threefold prayer of Jesus in Gethsemane (Matt 26:44). Stanley, Boasting in the Lord, 56, 58–60. For similar arguments, see Barnett, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 571; Plummer, Second Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians, 353. Jan Lambrecht, Second Corinthians (ed. Daniel J. Harrington; SP 8; Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1999), 203, however, thinks it “unlikely” that Paul’s reference to the “three times” is intended as an allusion to the Gethsemane event. Fee, Pauline Christology, 133. Paul does employ the title ku,rioj twelve times for God, but this is usually done when Paul is citing the LXX and where he does not make a point or place an emphasis on the divine name. The twelve LXX texts cited by Paul where ku,rioj applies to God are all found in the Roman and Corinthian letters of Paul: Ps 93:11 / 1 Cor 3:20; Isa 28:11 / 1 Cor 14:21; Isa 52:11 / 2 Cor 6:17; 2 Sam 7:14 / 2 Cor 6:18; Ps 31:2 / Rom 4:8; Isa 28:22 / Rom 9:28; Isa 1:9 / Rom 9:29; Isa 53:1 / Rom 10:16; 1 Kgs 19:10 / Rom 11:3; Isa 40:13 / Rom 11:34; Deut 32:35 / Rom 12:19; Ps 116:1 / Rom 15:11. See Fee, Pauline Christology, 87n7, 636–38. Barnett, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 571; Lambrecht, Second Corinthians, 203; Hendrikus Boers, Christ in the Letters of Paul: In Place of a Christology (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2006), 82–88; R. H. Strachan, The Second Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians (Moffatt New Testament Commentary; New York and London: Harper and Brothers, 1935), 32; Plummer, Second Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians, 353. Conybeare and Howson assert regarding the ku,rioj of 2 Cor 12:8, “That is, the Lord Jesus, as appears by ‘Christ’ in the next verse [12:9].” Conybeare and Howson, Life and Epistles of St. Paul, 462n4. Paul only mentions the “power of Christ” in 2 Cor 12:9. Paul usually attributes “power” to either God or the Spirit. See Petrus J. Gräbe, The Power of God in Paul’s Letters (2nd ed.; WUNT 2/123; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2008), 146. Hurtado, At the Origins of Christian Worship, 75; Lambrecht, Second Corinthians, 203. Hurtado notes that prayer to Jesus is much more common in apocryphal Christian literature than it is in the canonical writings. Hurtado, Lord Jesus Christ, 140. Gingrich and Danker, Shorter Lexicon of the Greek New Testament, 148. Barnett, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 571n24; Lambrecht, Second Corinthians, 203. Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 33.168. Liddell and Scott, Greek-English Lexicon, 522. Also see Victor Paul Furnish, II Corinthians: Translated with Introduction, Notes, and Commentary (AB 32A; Garden City, NY; Doubleday, 1984), 529. Plato, Leg. 2.666b. Also see Leg. 11.917b, 931c. BDAG, 1170. For instance when Josephus relates the story of the prophet Samuel praying for the Israelites for forgiveness, he writes, o` de. u`piscnei/tai kai. parakale,sein to.n qeo.n / “So he promised them that he would beseech God.” Josephus, Ant. 6.93. In Ant. 6.143, Josephus relates how Samuel, after hearing that God had rejected Saul as king, kai. diV o[lhj th/j nukto.j parakalei/n h;rxato to.n qeo.n katalla,ttesqai tw/| Saou,lw| kai. mh. calepai,nein  / “began to beseech God all that night to be reconciled to Saul, and not to be angry with him.” Also note Ant. 14.24 where the righteous man Onias prays to God directly and beseeches God not to hear the prayers of those who oppose the faithful. Note the use

NOTES

417. 418. 419. 420. 421. 422. 423.

424. 425.

426.

| 405

of the vocative in the opening line of the prayer, w= qee. basileu/ tw/n o[lwn . . . u`pakou/sai mh,te katV evkei,nwn a] ou-toi parakalou/sin / “O God, the King of the whole world! . . . that you will neither listen to the prayers of those against these.” We can see from these three citations among many others from Josephus that parakale,w was used as an acceptable term to denote prayer to God. O. Schmitz, TDNT 5:799. Longenecker, Studies in Paul, 30. Schmitz, TDNT 5:799. Thrall, 2 Corinthians 8–13, 819–20. Barrett, Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 316. Stanley, Boasting in the Lord, 110. Thrall, 2 Corinthians 8–13, 818; Hahn, Worship of the Early Church, 69n16; Hurtado, Lord Jesus Christ, 140; Capes, Reeves and Richards, Rediscovering Paul, 168; Lambrecht, Second Corinthians, 203; Malherbe, Letters to the Thessalonians, 212; Cullmann, Prayer in the New Testament, 86. Stanley, Boasting in the Lord, 53. Examples can be seen in the triple Aaronic blessing or benediction (Num 6:24–26), and Elijah’s threefold breathing on the widow’s son while praying (1 Kgs 17:21). The significance of the number three and prayer is also attested in the Qumran literature (1QS 10.1–7; 1QH 12.3–9). Threefold prayer is also known in Greek religion. Thrall, 2 Corinthians 8–13, 818. Neyrey, Give God the Glory, 9. The five characteristic elements found in prayer according to Neyrey (italics mine for emphasis) and which appear in 2 Cor 12:8–10 are: The sender (Paul: “Three times I appealed to the Lord”). The message (Paul’s petition: “that it [“thorn in the flesh”] would leave me”). The medium (presumably verbal: “Three times I appealed”). The receiver (Paul: receives response “My grace is sufficient for you, for power is made perfect in weakness”; superior/subordinate relationship, the Lord/Paul). 5. The purpose (result and effect: “So, I will boast all the more gladly of my weaknesses, so that the power of Christ may dwell in me. Therefore [dio.] I am content with weaknesses, insults, hardships, persecutions, and calamities for the sake of Christ; for [ga.r] whenever I am weak, then I am strong.” 1. 2. 3. 4.

427. A similar thought appears in 1 Cor 1:2 where the risen Jesus is invoked in “every place.” A similar notion is evident in the language used in Matt 18:20 where Jesus says, ou- ga,r eivsin du,o h" trei/j sunhgme,noi eivj to. evmo.n o;noma evkei/ eivmi evn me,sw| auvtw/n / “For where two or three are gathered in my name, I am there in the midst of them.” In this text, the presence of Jesus himself is promised to his disciples wherever they gather in his name. What is also significant in the Matthean gospel is the later promise of the risen Lord of his continued presence with his disciples until the end of the age (Matt 28:20). The act of gathering in Jesus’ name constituted the Christian assembly where the presence of Jesus was realized (cf. 1 Cor 5:4). Thiselton notes that the language of assembling in the name of the Lord Jesus was understood to convey the idea of “meeting as a Christian congregation.”

406

428. 429.

430. 431. 432.

433.

434. 435. 436. 437.

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

Thiselton, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 393. Note the similarity in language between Matt 18:20 and that of the Mishnah Abot 3.2: “But if two sit together and the words of the Law [are spoken] between them, the Divine Presence [the Shekinah] rests between them.” See Herbert Danby, The Mishnah (London: Oxford University Press, 1958), 450. On the theme of the divine presence in Jesus in the Matthean gospel, see David D. Kupp, Matthew’s Emmanuel: Divine Presence and God’s People in the First Gospel (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996). Thrall, 2 Corinthians 8–13, 820. In 1 Cor 4:19, Paul speaks of his soon visit to the Corinthians but qualifies it with the phrase, eva.n o` ku,rioj qelh,sh|  / “if the Lord wills” where the Lord here again is the risen Lord Jesus. Paul saw his visit to the Corinthians conditioned on the will of the Lord. In 1 Cor 16:7, Paul has the same idea in mind but uses another word, evan. o` ku,rioj evpitre,yh| / “if the Lord permits.” The ku,rioj here is also Jesus. Fee, Pauline Christology, 139, 583. Fee, Pauline Christology, 139 notes regarding 1 Cor 4:19; 16:7, “Again, this appears to be another instance where Paul, almost casually, assumes that Christ shares equally in prerogatives that otherwise belong to God alone.” There is no reason to deny that the ku,rioj here is the risen Jesus, since Paul clearly identifies the will of God by the usage of the term qelh,matoj qeou/ as he does in 1 Cor 1:1 and 2 Cor 1:1 (cf. Eph 1:1; Col 1:1; 2 Tim 1:1). The “will of God” is a phrase that occurs some thirteen times in the Pauline corpus. Fee, Pauline Christology, 583. For Paul, the will of the Lord Jesus was also the divine will. Prayer appears to be answered in three ways: (1) yes, (2) no, or (3) wait. “Even prayers which are not heard are willed by God.” Cullmann, Prayer in the New Testament, 144. Dunn, Theology of Paul, 258. Furnish, II Corinthians, 550. Contra Belleville, 2 Corinthians, 309 who states, “God’s grace is sufficient because his power is made perfect in weakness” (italics in original). The speaker in the text here is the risen Lord Jesus, not God. Barclay, Letters to the Corinthians, 289 commits the same error in attributing this christological direct speech to God rather than to the risen Jesus. Ernest Best also appears to confuse matters in 2 Cor 12:8–10 by stating that Paul “prayed to God” three times, but then states that “the Lord” whom Paul addresses is Jesus! Ernest Best, Second Corinthians (Interpretation; Louisville: John Knox Press, 1987), 119–20. See also 2 Thess 3:18. Eph 6:24 has, “Grace be with all who have an undying love for our Lord Jesus Christ.” Col 4:18 and the Pastorals consistently end with the benediction, “Grace be with you” (1 Tim 6:21; 2 Tim 4:22); “Grace be with all of you” (Titus 3:15). On the Pauline letter endings, see Jeffrey A. D. Weima, “Pauline Letter Closings: Analysis and Hermeneutical Significance,” Bulletin for Biblical Research 5 (1995): 177–98; Bauckham, “Jesus, Worship of” ABD 3:813. Furnish, II Corinthians, 531. Thrall, 2 Corinthians 8–13, 828. Thrall, 2 Corinthians 8–13, 820. Hurtado, At the Origins of Christian Worship, 75.

NOTES

| 407

438. Barnett, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 571. Barnett goes on to say here that Christian believers in addition to prayer to the risen Jesus could also pray “to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ” (571). I will examine in the next section below examples in Paul where both God and Jesus are appealed to in prayer. 439. Hurtado, Lord Jesus Christ, 140. 440. Stanley, Boasting in the Lord, 52–53. 441. Lucien Cerfaux, Recueil Lucien Cerfaux: Études d’exégèse et d’histoire Religieuse de Monseigneur Cerfaux Réunies à l’occasion de Son Soixante-Dixième Anniversaire (Gemblux: J. Duculot, 1954), 2:475–77. 442. Moule, Worship in the New Testament, 70. 443. Käsemann, Commentary on Romans, 292. 444. Delling, Worship in the New Testament, 116. 445. Delling, Worship in the New Testament, 119. 446. Delling, Worship in the New Testament, 117. 447. See sec. 1.3. of chap. 2. 448. Bauckham, Jesus and the God of Israel, 129 (italics in original). See also Bauckham, “Jesus, Worship of” ABD 3:813. 449. Wiles, Paul’s Intercessory Prayers. 450. Wiles, Paul’s Intercessory Prayers, 16n3; 238. 451. Wiles, Paul’s Intercessory Prayers, 238n3. 452. Conzelmann, TDNT 9:413. 453. Greeven, TDNT 2:806. 454. See Longenecker, Studies in Paul, 29–30. 455. Herrmann, TDNT 2:790 456. Bauckham, God Crucified, 10–11. 457. Longenecker, Studies in Paul, 30. 458. Cullmann, Prayer in the New Testament, 144. 459. Hunter, “Prayer,” DPL, 726. 460. Hunter “Prayer,” DPL, 727. 461. Wiles, Paul’s Intercessory Prayers, 22. 462. Some examples of wish prayers are: Ps 20:1–5, 9; 1 Kgs 8:57–61; 2 Macc 1:2–6. 463. Hunter, “Prayer,” DPL, 727. Other places where Paul uses wish prayers are 1 Thess 5:23; Rom 15:5–6, 13, 33. 464. Wiles, Paul’s Intercessory Prayers, 52; Richard, First and Second Thessalonians, 165; Jan Lambrecht, “Thanksgivings in 1  Thessalonians 1–3,” in The Thessalonian Debate: Methodological Discord or Methodological Synthesis? (ed. Karl P. Donfried and Johannes Beutler; Grand Rapids; Cambridge, UK: Eerdmans, 2000), 148. 465. Leon Morris, The Epistles of Paul to the Thessalonians: An Introduction and Commentary (Tyndale New Testament Commentaries; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974), 69. 466. Beverly Roberts Gaventa, First and Second Thessalonians (Interpretation; Louisville: John Knox Press, 1998), 45. 467. O’Brien, Introductory Thanksgivings in the Letters of Paul, 264. Also see Malherbe, Letters to the Thessalonians, 211.

408

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

468. Fee, Pauline Christology, 575. 469. Wallace, Basics of New Testament Syntax, 209 (italics in original). See also Zerwick, Biblical Greek, 123. 470. Gaventa, First and Second Thessalonians, 45; Gregory K. Beale, 1–2 Thessalonians (ed. Grant R. Osborne; IVP New Testament Commentary Series; Downers Grove, IL; Leicester, UK: Inter-Varsity Press, 2003), 108. These terms become the identity markers in Paul for the Father and Christ as seen in the so-called Christian Shema in 1 Cor 8:6. 471. Hunter, “Prayer,” DPL, 727. 472. Hurtado, One God, One Lord, 105. 473. Wanamaker, Epistle to the Thessalonians, 141. Morris comments: “Prayer is offered only to God; also, only One who was divine could be bracketed in this way with the Father.” Morris, Epistles of Paul to the Thessalonians, 69. 474. Fee, Pauline Christology, 75n124. 475. Following this evidence, Morris asserts that “this is evidence that from a very early time Christians accepted the deity of our Lord without question.” Morris, Epistles of Paul to the Thessalonians, 69. 476. Hurtado, Lord Jesus Christ, 139. All these points, Dunn argues, “accords with a high Christology of Jesus as highly exalted Lord.” Dunn, Theology of Paul, 258. Also see Fee. Pauline Christology, 55. 477. C. J. Davis notes that “there are no examples of such binitarian prayer within pre-Christian monotheism.” C. J. Davis, The Name and Way of the Lord: Old Testament Themes, New Testament Christology (JSNTS 129; Sheffield, UK: Sheffield Academic, 1996), 153. Also see Fee, First and Second Letters to the Thessalonians, 130–31. 478. Hurtado, Lord Jesus Christ, 139. See also Wanamaker, Epistle to the Thessalonians, 141. 479. Aune, “Worship, Early Christian,” ABD 6:974. 480. Hunter “Prayer,” DPL, 731. 481. Hunter, “Prayer,” DPL, 727. 482. Fee, First and Second Letters to the Thessalonians, 128–29n5. 483. Wiles, Paul’s Intercessory Prayers. 484. Fee, Pauline Christology, 53; Also see Wanamaker, Epistle to the Thessalonians, 141–42; Gaventa, First and Second Thessalonians, 46; Frame, Epistles of St.Paul to the Thessalonians, 136. The verb kateuqu,nai is used “of removing obstacles out of the way.” Morris, Epistles of Paul to the Thessalonians, 143. 485. F. F. Bruce, 1 and 2 Thessalonians (Waco: Word, 1982), 71. 486. 1 Chr 29:18; Ps 32:8; 37:23; Prov 3:6; 16:9. 487. Morris, Epistles of Paul to the Thessalonians, 70; Gaventa, First and Second Thessalonians, 46; Richard, First and Second Thessalonians, 165. 488. Richard, First and Second Thessalonians, 172; Best, First and Second Epistles to the Thessalonians, 148. 489. Morris, Epistles of Paul to the Thessalonians, 69. 490. Morris, Epistles of Paul to the Thessalonians, 138. 491. Malherbe, Letters to the Thessalonians, 441 comments: “Most striking is that Christ is mentioned before God.” This need not imply anything unusual by mentioning the risen

NOTES

492. 493.

494. 495.

496.

497. 498.

499.

500. 501.

502.

| 409

Jesus first. While it was Paul’s well-known habit to mention God the Father first (as he does in 1 Thess 3:11), Paul is known to reverse the order at times in his letters as he does with the benediction in 2 Cor 13:13 where he has the order: Christ, God, Holy Spirit. See Morris, Epistles of Paul to the Thessalonians, 138–39. See also Gal 1:1 where Paul mentions the risen Jesus first and then God the Father. Fee, Pauline Christology, 575. See also Malherbe, Letters to the Thessalonians, 442. Most commentators see “the Lord” here as referring back to 2 Thess 2:16–17 who is clearly identified as Christ. Fee, Pauline Christology, 65n107. See also Morris, Epistles of Paul to the Thessalonians, 143; Best, First and Second Epistles to the Thessalonians, 148; Malherbe, Letters to the Thessalonians, 447. Bruce, 1 and 2 Thessalonians, 71. Fee, Pauline Christology, 575. Fee in company with other commentators argue that there is an apparent intertextual use of LXX 1 Chr 29:18 where David prays, ku,rie o` qeo.j . . . kai. kateu,qunon ta.j kardi,aj auvtw/n pro.j se, / “Lord God . . . also direct their hearts toward you.” Fee, Pauline Christology, 66. Most of the early Greek fathers saw “the Lord” mentioned in the text as referring to the Holy Spirit, since God and Christ are mentioned in what follows, but as Fee notes, “that is an interpretation driven by Trinitarian theology, not by Pauline usage.” Fee, Pauline Christology, 65n107. I note here another echo with the Johannine gospel where Jesus gives his disciples his own peace, a peace unlike what the world can give (John 14:27). In the Pauline letters, the phrase o` de. qeo.j th/j eivrh,nhj / “the God of peace” (Rom 15:33; 16:20; cf. 1 Cor 14:33), o` qeo.j th/j eivrh,nhj / “the God of peace” (1 Thess 5:23; Phil 4:9) appears. What is striking is the similarity 2 Thess 3:16 has with 1 Thess 5:23: Auvto.j de. o` qeo.j th/j eivrh,nhj a`gia,sai u`ma/j o`lotelei/j / “May the God of peace himself sanctify you entirely.” In both cases the intensive pronoun auvto.j is used of the subject “the Lord of peace himself” / “the God of peace himself,” and both use the optative verb: dw,|h and a`gia,sai. We can also add to this the Pastoral Letters. In 2 Tim 1:16,18 ,we encounter a wish prayer: dw,|h e;leoj o` ku,rioj tw/| VOnhsifo,rou oi;kw| . . . dw,|h auvtw/| o` ku,rioj eu`rei/n e;leoj para. kuri,ou evn evkei,nh| th/| h`me,ra| / “May the Lord grant mercy to the household of Onesiphorus . . . may the Lord grant that he will find mercy from the Lord on that day!” Here we see the writer making a wish prayer that the Lord, who in Pauline parlance is a reference the majority of the time to the risen Jesus, to grant mercy in the present to the house of Onesiphorus and to grant mercy in the future. The act of granting mercy is a divine prerogative usually attributed to God in the OT. See Towner, Letters to Timothy and Titus, 482–84. Best, First and Second Epistles to the Thessalonians, 147. Hurtado, Lord Jesus Christ, 146. Hurtado supplies a helpful bibiliography on the subject of hymns in the NT and other early Christian texts in Hurtado, Lord Jesus Christ, 147n161. See also Hurtado, At the Origins of Christian Worship, 86–92. Leonard Thompson, “Hymns in Early Christian Worship,” Anglican Theological Review 55 (1973): 458–72.

410

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

503. On this subject, see Martin, “Hymns, Hymn Fragments, Songs, Spirutal Songs,” DPL, 419–23; Jack  T. Sanders, The New Testament Christolgical Hymns: Their Historical Religious Background (Society for New Testament Studies Monograph Series 15; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1971); John F. Balchin, “Colossians 1:15–20: An Early Christian Hymn? The Arguments from Style,” Vox Evangelica 15 (1985): 65–94; Delling, TDNT 8:500–502; David M. Stanley, The Apostolic Church in the New Testament (Westminster, MD: Newman Press, 1967), 99–118; and Aune, “Worship, Early Christian,” ABD 6:982. 504. Ralph P. Martin, A Hymn of Christ: Philippians 2:5–11 in Recent Interpretation and in the Setting of Early Christian Worship (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1997), 17–18; Ralph P. Martin, “Hymns, Hymn Fragments, Songs, Spirutal Songs,” DPL, 419–20. The importance of hymns is also attested in Qumran as seen in the Hymns of Thanksgiving scroll, 1QH 11:3–4. See Longenecker, New Wine into Fresh Wineskins, 7. 505. Hengel notes that next to Isaiah, the Psalter was the most important prophetic OT text to the early Christians. The Psalter became for the early Christians, according to Hengel, “the hymnbook of the Church.” Hengel, Studies in Early Christology, 260 (italics in original). 506. Josephus, Ag. Ap. 1.40. See also Ant. 2.346; 7.305, 364. 507. Also 2 Macc 10:7, which says, u[mnouj avne,feron tw/| euvodw,santi kaqarisqh/nai to.n e`autou/ to,pon / “they offered hymns of thanksgiving to him who had given success to the purifying of his own holy place” (NRSV). Sirach 50:18, kai. h;|nesan oi` yaltw|doi. evn fwnai/j auvtw/n evn plei,stw| h;cw| evgluka,nqh me,loj / “And the singers praised him with their voices in sweet and full-toned melody.” These texts clearly attest to the use of hymns in Judaism prior to the first century CE. See also Josephus, Ant. 20.218; Tamid 7:4. 508. Martin, “Some Reflections on New Testament Hymns,” 39. Martin is following W. Schrage, TDNT 7:798–852. Martin argued in an earlier book that singing may have been part of the synagogue worship, but he raises doubt as to whether Judean synagogues had a hymnic feature to them. Martin, Worship in the Early Church, 24–25, 40–41. 509. Martin, “Some Reflections on New Testament Hymns,” 39. 510. See Hymns of Thanksgiving scroll, 1QH 11:3–4. On the hymns of Qumran, see Vermes, Complete Dead Sea Scrolls in English, 243–300, 321–30. Vermes has also noted that the hymns are “individual prayers as opposed to those intended for communal worship.” Vermes, Complete Dead Sea Scrolls in English, 149. This would indicate that the Judean sectarians in Qumran employed hymns individually and perhaps privately. 511. Martin, “Some Reflections on New Testament Hymns,” 39. 512. Aune, “Worship, Early Christian,” ABD 6:978. 513. Smith, “Ancient Synagogue, the Early Church and Singing,” 1–16. Smith shows that according to the NT presentation of the synagogue service on the Sabbath (Luke 4:16–19; Acts 13:14–41; cf. 15:21), there is a reading of the OT texts and an exposition or homily which follows. The synagogue was also referred to as a “place of prayer” (Acts 16:13, 16), therefore indicating that prayers were offered in synagogal assemblies. Josephus also mentions a synagogue service as involving the reading of the Law (C. Ap. 2.17). What is lacking in all of these descriptions, according to Smith, is an absence of any reference

NOTES

514. 515. 516. 517. 518.

519. 520. 521. 522. 523. 524.

525.

526.

| 411

to singing or psalmody. The synagogue appeared to be more concentrated on prayer and religious instruction. Even in Justin Martyr’s mid-second-century account of a Christian gathering, it is interesting that while he mentions a Sunday service in Rome including the Eucharist, readings from what appears to be both the OT and NT, homily, and prayer, there is no mention of either singing hymns or a psalmody. Smith, “Ancient Synagogue, the Early Church and Singing,” 4–5, 7–8. Smith,“Ancient Synagogue, the Early Church and Singing,” 1. Smith, “Ancient Synagogue, the Early Church and Singing,” 1–2, 7. See sections 1.1. and 1.3. in chap. 2. Smith, “Ancient Synagogue, the Early Church and Singing,” 5. Smith, “Ancient Synagogue, the Early Church and Singing,” 6–7, 8. Smith further states that “the variety of form and content of the early Christian assemblies militates strongly against the idea that Christian worship was basically a continuation of the synagogue service.” Smith, “Ancient Synagogue, the Early Church and Singing,” 8. Smith, “Ancient Synagogue, the Early Church and Singing,” 6. Smith, “Ancient Synagogue, the Early Church and Singing,” 9. Smith, “Ancient Synagogue, the Early Church and Singing,” 9. Smith, “Ancient Synagogue, the Early Church and Singing,” 15. See sec. 8.1.2. of chap. 4. I will not enter into the debate as to whether the Last Supper was a Passover meal or not but note that it occurred during the Passover celebration, which included the Feast of Unleavened Bread. On the Last Supper and its relation to the Passover, see Jeremias, Eucharistic Words of Jesus, 41–62; A. T. Robertson, A Harmony of the Gospels for Students of the Life of Christ (San Francisco: Harper San Francisco, 1922), 279–84. On Mark 14:26, see H. B. Swete, The Gospel According to St. Mark: The Greek Text with Introduction Notes and Indices (London: Macmillan, 1913), 337–38; R. T. France, The Gospel of Mark: A Commentary on the Greek Text (NIGTC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans; Carlisle: Paternoster, 2002), 574; James R. Edwards, The Gospel According to Mark (Pillar New Testament Commentary; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans; Leicester, UK: APOLLOS, 2002), 427; Ben Witherington, The Gospel of Mark: A Socio-Historical Commentary (Grand Rapids; Cambridge, UK: Eermands, 2001), 375–76; John  R. Donahue and Daniel  J. Harrington, The Gospel of Mark (ed. and Daniel  J. Harrington; SP  2; Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2002), 401; and William L. Lane, The Gospel According to Mark (NICNT; Grand Rapids; Cambridge, UK: Eerdmans, 1974), 509. On Matt 26:30, see Craig S. Keener, A Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (Grand Rapids; Cambridge, UK: Eerdmans, 1999), 633; Robert H. Gundry, Matthew: A Commentary on His Handbook for a Mixed Church Under Persecution (2nd ed.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,1994), 529; Leon Morris, The Gospel According to Matthew (Pillar New Testament Commentary: Grand Rapids: Eerdmans; Leicester, UK: APOLLOS, 1992), 662; Daneil J. Harrington, The Gospel of Matthew (ed. Daniel J. Harrington; SP 1; Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1991), 368; William D. Davies and Dale C. Allison, Matthew 19–28 (ICC; London; New York: T&T Clark, 2004), 483–84. Gundry, Matthew, 529.

412

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

527. Philo notes that the Passover is celebrated metV euvcw/n te kai. u[mnwn / “with prayers and hymns.” Philo, Spec. 2.148. 528. The religious domestic environment in the Last Supper account is seen in its domestic setting as it is held in the upper room of a house where Jesus and his disciples are gathered as a family or household and eat a meal. See Smith, “Ancient Synagogue, the Early Church and Singing,” 14. 529. Davies and Allison, Matthew 19–28, 484. John Chrysostom, Hom. Matt. 82.2 notes that in the singing of the hymn in Matt 26:30, Jesus was giving an example for Christian worship. 530. On Paul’s house churches, see M. Bruce Button and Fika J. van Rensburg, “The ‘House Churches’ in Corinth,” Neotestamentica 37.1 (2003): 1–28. 531. Smith, “Ancient Synagogue, the Early Church and Singing,” 13. Smith also adds here that there was “the continued use of houses as places of Christian assembly until well into the third century.” 532. Smith asserts that “the Last Supper is of signal importance” to understanding the source of hymns in early Christianity. Smith, “Ancient Synagogue, the Early Church and Singing,” 16. 533. Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 33.114. 534. BDAG, 1027. 535. Delling, TDNT 8:490 notes that the verb u`mne,w means “to sing a song.” Cullmann, Prayer in the New Testament, 72 views psalms, hymns, and songs as “prayers.” 536. Delling, TDNT 8:500. 537. When Philo refers to the Psalms in the OT, he refers to the collection as u[mnoij / “hymns” (Philo, Plant. 1.29; Fug. 1.59; Conf. 1.39; Migr. 1.157; Mut. 1.115; Somn. 1.75; 2.242, 245). 538. Philo, Spec. 1.272 (translation mine). 539. Philo also states in Agr. 1. 80, di,kaion ga.r kai. nohtw/j kai. aivsqhtw/j tou.j eivj to. qei/on u[mnouj kai. euvdaimonismou.j avnuperqe,twj poiei/sqai kai. tw/n ovrga,nwn evmmelw/j krou,ein e`ka,teron( to, te nou/nou/j kai. aivsqh,sewj( evpi. th/| tou/ mo,nou swth/roj euvcaristi,a| kai. timh/|  / “For it is just that hymns and praises should be uttered in honor of God without any delay, both in accordance with the suggestions of the intellect and the perceptions of the outward senses, and that each instrument should be struck in harmony, I mean those both of the mind and of the outward sense, in gratitude and honour to the holy Savior” (italics mine). Philo sees the rendering of honor to God in the use of hymns. Here we see hymns functioning as vehicles or levels of action in which God is honored. See also Philo, Plant.1.135; Ebr. 1.105; Sobr. 1.13, 58; Migr. 1.113; Her. 1.110; Conf. 1.108; Somn. 1.35, 37, 256; 2.34, 38; Mos. 1.180, 284; 2.256–57; Spec. 1.224; 2.148, 199; Contempl. 1.29, 80–81, 84, 87; Flacc. 1.122. 540. Philo, Mos. 2.162. Also see Spec. 3.125. 541. Philo, Legat. 1.91–115. On hymns sung to Gaius, see Legat. 1.96. 542. On Cleanthes’s Hymn to Zeus, see Barrett, The New Testament Background, 63. On other Greek hymns to various gods, see Thomas W. Allen and E. E. Sikes, eds., The Homeric

NOTES

543. 544. 545.

546.

| 413

Hymns (London: Macmillan, 1904); Delling, TDNT 8:491–93; Delling, Worship in the New Testament, 86. See Plato, Resp. 10.607a. Arrian, Anab. 4.11.2. See comments in Horbury, Jewish Messianism and the Cult of Christ, 71. Pliny the Younger, Ep. Tra. 10:96.7 (italics mine). See Brown, Introduction to New Testament Christology, 188; Stanley, Apostolic Church in the New Testament, 98–99. Both Tertullian, Apol. 2.6 and Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 3.33.1 understood Pliny’s statements to be to be referring to the singing of hymns about and to Christ. See Hurtado, Lord Jesus Christ, 148n168. That Pliny (Ep. Tra. 10.96.5–6) himself understood the context to be religious and therefore one of worship is evident in his previous comments regarding the same Christians: cum praeeunte me deos appellarent et imagini tuae, quam propter hoc iusseram cum simulacris numinum afferri, ture ac vino supplicarent . . . omnes et imaginem tuam deorumque simulacra venerati sunt et Christo maledixerunt. if they repeated after me a prayer of invocation to the gods, and made an offering of wine and incense to your statue, which I had brought into the court along with the statues of the gods, for this purpose . . . All these reverenced your statue and those of the gods, and cursed Christ.

547. 548. 549. 550.

551. 552.

A number of things should be noted. Pliny uses invocation as an expression as I have discussed above with invocation in Paul’s letters. The idea of sacrifice or offering is also associated with worship as we saw with Paul in 1 Cor 10:19–22 and Rom 12:1. In associating the statue of Trajan with “the statues of the gods,” Pliny was associating the emperor with the gods. The reverence paid to both Trajan’s statue and those of the gods clearly places the emperor himself in a religious context where, according to my criteria, worship takes place. The notion of rivalry in worship is seen in the fact that Christ is cursed as a sign of allegiance to the emperor and the Roman gods. On cursing Christ, see also Polycarp Mart. Pol. 9.3. See Delling, TDNT 8:493–98. Aune, “Early Christian Worship,” ABD 6:980. Morris, First Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians, 195; Robertson and Plummer, First Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians, 320–21. Robertson and Plummer, First Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians, 312; Collins, First Corinthians, 502 notes, “The spirit is the faculty by which one is in communion with the deity.” Martin, “Some Reflections on New Testament Hymns,” 45. Martin, “Aspects of Worship in the New Testament Church,” 9. Martin goes on to differentiate the Christian understanding of the spatial distance between God and humans with that of the Greek notion of apotheosis. Martin comments, “This difference is not always observed in Greek thought; and man is thought to reach his truest fulfillment by attaining divinity which the gods enjoy.” K. Keyssner also notes that “the highest human

414

553.

554. 555. 556.

557. 558. 559. 560. 561. 562.

563. 564. 565. 566. 567. 568. 569. 570. 571.

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

desire is to come as nearly as possible to the divine existence, to become as the gods.” K. Keyssner, Gottesvortsellung und Lebensauffassung im griechischen Hymnus (Würzburger: Studien zur Altertumswissenschaft 2; Stuttgart, 1932), 168–69. While the Christian worldview emphasizes spatial distance in ontological terms between God and humanity, Greek religion by contrast tended to emphasize spatial proximity. The various genres of psalms found in the OT Psalter attest to this as there are psalms of lamentation, praise, thanksgiving, calls for help, imprecatory requests, and so on. On Paul and the Psalms, see Roy A. Harrisville, “Paul and the Psalms: A Formal Study,” Word & World 5.2 (1985): 168–79. Neyrey, Give God the Glory, 12–13. The other acts which Neyrey lists under “prayer” are blessing, praising, thanksgiving, confession, confession of sins, and petitionary requests. Neyrey, Give God the Glory, 13. See Thiselton, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 1131–37; Hays, First Corinthians, 240–41; Collins, First Corinthians, 511–12; Morris, First Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians, 194–95; Keener, 1–2 Corinthians, 116–17. Morris, First Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians, 194. Aune “Early Christian Worship,” ABD 6:979; See also Fee, Listening to the Spirit in the Text, 91–92. Robertson and Plummer, First Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians, 240. Hahn, Worship of the Early Church, 36. Hurtado, Lord Jesus Christ, 73, 147. Hurtado notes that the use of the psalm in 1 Cor 14:26 was “one of the features of the worship gathering” (147). The ESV, NIV, NRSV, and RSV in 1 Cor 14:26 translate yalmo,j as “hymn.” This indicates that the translators saw the terms “psalm” and “hymn” to be synonymous. Morris sees “psalm” as synonymous with a hymn. Morris, First Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians, 194. Philo refers to the Psalms in the OT as u[mnoij / “hymns” (Plant. 1.29; Fug. 1.59; Conf. 1.39; Mig. 1.157). Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 33.112. BDAG, 891. See also Hurtado, Lord Jesus Christ, 147. Martin, “Hymns, Hymn Fragments, Songs, Spirutal Songs,” DPL, 986. The word diaire,seij from diai,resij is only used by Paul in the NT and only in 1 Cor 12:4–6. Morris, First Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians, 194. Hays, First Corinthians, 241. Hays, First Corinthians, 241. See sec. 4.1. of chap. 4. Martin, “Some Reflections on New Testament Hymns,” 38. This may have to do with the lack of unity within the Corinthian faith community and the opponents Paul is facing within the same community. The divisions and lack of unity is referred to in 1 Cor 1:10–17. See Fee, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 51–65; Thiselton, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 105–42; Hays, First Corinthians, 21–25; Collins, First Corinthians, 67–86; Keener, 1–2  Corinthians, 23–27; and Morris, First Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians, 39–43.

NOTES

| 415

572. A Schlatter, Paulus: Der bote Jesu (Stuttgart: Calwer Verlag, 1969), 383. 573. Martin, “Some Reflections on New Testament Hymns,” 39. Martin makes reference to the “Hebrew psalter” as the basis of the psalm, but the Greek word itself, yalmo,j, is attested in the LXX (1 Sam 16:18; 2 Sam 23:1; Isa 66:20; Lam 3:14; 5:14; Amos 5:23), not in the MT. 574. On Eph 5:19, see Best, Ephesians, 510–13; John Muddimann, The Epistle to the Ephesians (Black’s New Testament Commentaries; New York: Continuum, 2001), 248–49; Rudolph Schnackenburg, The Epistle to the Ephesians: A Commentary (trans. Helen Heron; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1991), 237–38. Delling thinks LXX Ps 26:6 may be behind Eph 5:19. Delling, TDNT 8:499; Stanley, Apostolic Church in the New Testament, 97–98. 575. Martin Hengel, Between Paul and Jesus: Studies in the Earliest History of Christianity (trans. J. Bowden; London: SCM Press, 1983), 80. 576. Delling, Worship in the New Testament, 86. 577. For a study of these various terms in terms of grammar and meaning, see John Eadie, A Commentary on the Greek Text of the Epistle of Paul to the Ephesians (ed. W. Young; London and Glasgow : R. Griffin, 1854.; repr. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1979), 2:398–404. Andrew T. Lincoln notes that “it is difficult to draw any hard and fast distinctions among the three categories of psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs.” Andrew T. Lincoln, Ephesians (WBC 42; Dallas: Word, 1990), 345. Bruce, Epistle to the Colossians, to Philemon, and to the Ephesians, 158–59 agrees with Lincoln. 578. The practice of singing hymns to the risen Jesus also presupposes that Jesus is alive, and therefore can personally receive the devotion that Christians render to him in hymns and spiritual songs. A case in point where we see psalms being addressed to the risen Jesus in the NT is found in the later text of Heb 1:8–12, which cites both Ps 45:6–7 (Heb 1:8–9) and Ps 102:25–26 (Heb 1:10–12). In the context of Heb 1:8–12, God the Father is addressing the Son in the words of the respective psalms. See Bauckham, “Jesus, Worship of” ABD 3:815. 579. Delling, Worship in the New Testament, 87. 580. Hurtado, At the Origins of Christian Worship, 90; Eadie, Epistle of Paul to the Ephesians, 403–4; Schnackenburg, Epistle to the Ephesians, 238. 581. Delling, TDNT 8:498. Also see Stanley, Apostolic Church in the New Testament, 97–98. 582. Lincoln adds as a result that “Christ’s divine status is implicit .  .  . to him worship is directed.” Lincoln, Ephesians, 348. Bruce also notes that Christians “addressed prayers and praises to him [Christ] in a manner which tacitly, and at time expressly, acknowledged him to be no less than God.” Bruce, Epistle to the Colossians, to Philemon, and to the Ephesians, 159. Martin notes, “Hymnology and Christology thus merged in the worship of one Lord.” Martin, “Some Reflections on New Testament Hymns,” 49. 583. William Hendriksen notes that the reflexive pronoun e`autoi/j is used as a reciprocal pronoun and is better translated as “to one another.” William Hendriksen, Exposition of Galatians and Ephesians (New Testament Commentary; Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1967), 240n147. 584. See sec. 1.2.3. of chap. 3.

416

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

585. Bruce, Epistle to the Colossians, to Philemon, and to the Ephesians, 159. Eduard Lohse also notes, “Man should not only praise God with his lips. The entire man should be filled with songs of praise.” Eduard Lohse, Colossians and Philemon (Hermeneia; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1971), 151. 586. Aune, “Worship, Early Christian,” ABD 6:982. Aune references here Johannes Quasten, Music and Worship in Pagan and Christian Antiquity (trans. Boniface Ramsay; Studies in Church Music and Liturgy; Washington, DC: National Association of Pastoral Musicians, 1983), 78. 587. Philo, Plant. 1.126. 588. Hendriksen, Exposition of Galatians and Ephesians, 240 argues that this notion should be “dismissed,” but Hendricksen may be too hasty here. Paul also spoke of praying privately in his spirit and in his mind 1 Cor 14:15: yalw/ tw/| pneu,mati yalw/ Îde.Ð kai. tw/| noi ynEåp.li ~x,l,Þ-lk'a/l, (MT), “to eat bread before the Lord” (RSV), which is its literal translation. In the Eucharist, a;rtoj (1 Cor 10:16–17; 11:23, 26–28) is to be eaten presumably also before the Lord who is Jesus and who is personally present with the gathered Christian community (1 Cor 5:4). The eating and drinking aspect in relation to the worship of God and fellowship with God in the OT is highlighted in Exod 24:11: “God did not lay his hand on the chief men of the people of Israel; also they beheld God, and they ate and drank.” The OT legislation called for the observance of the three annual feasts: Passover, Weeks (Pentecost), and Tabernacles (Exod 23:14–19), and also the festive celebration of the tithe (Deut 14:22–27), which included the requirement to eat in the presence of YHWH (LXX; ku,rioj). See Fee, Pauline Christology, 122. 655. John Piper, The Justification of God: An Exegetical and Theological Study of Romans 9:1–23 (2nd ed.; (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 1993), 38.

422

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

656. Philo, Spec. 1.221. 657. Fee, Pauline Christology, 122; Fee, To What End Exegesis? 113–18. Fee has counted twenty-five extant papyrus invitations to such meals in honor of various gods. Fee, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 361n14 cites a sample of a papyrus invitation given as follows: “Chaeremon requests your company at the table of the lord Sarapis.” Also see Martin, Worship in the Early Church, 124. Josephus also recounts an invitation to a meal of Anubis in the temple of Isis in Rome. Josephus, Ant 18.73. 658. Dunn, Theology of Paul, 620. 659. Dunn, Theology of Paul, 612. 660. Smith, From Symposium to Eucharist, 216. 661. Taussig, In the Beginning Was the Meal, 22. 662. Taussig, In the Beginning Was the Meal, 169. 663. See Taussig, In the Beginning Was the Meal, 168–71. 664. Smith, From Symposium to Eucharist, 175. 665. Dunn, Theology of Paul, 612. This seems to be presumed in 1 Cor 10:1–5 where Paul speaks of Moses and the Israelites who were said to be baptized into Moses in the cloud and the sea and who also ate the same spiritual food and drank in the wilderness. The allusion to baptism preceding eating and drinking appears to presume that baptism was first administered and then participation in the Eucharist followed in the Christian community. One who was not part of the faith community of Israel was forbidden to partake, for instance, of the Passover meal. According to Exod 12:43–45, no foreigner could partake of the Passover meal unless he was circumcised and thus associated with the faith community of Israel (Exod 12:44, 48–49). It is highly significant that the first appearance of the noun latrei,a appears in LXX Exod 12:25 (12:25–27) with the institution of the Passover, which marked a commemorative meal to celebrate the exodus of Israel from bondage. Thus the Passover celebration was the inauguration of latrei,a at the beginning of Israel’s history as a religious national entity. Paul also speaks of one of the privileges being given to Israel as being latrei,a (Rom 9:4). It is possible in the case of Paul that only baptized believers were admitted to the Eucharist. This becomes the rule in the second-century document Did. 9:6. Paul in 1 Cor 10:1–5 draws the analogy of Moses and the Israelites in the wilderness with that of the Christians in Corinth, especially on the theme of idolatry. 666. Dunn, Theology of Paul, 609–11; Murphy-O’Connor, St. Paul’s Corinth, 167–68. 667. See Fee, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 558–67. Fee correctly notes that Paul is dealing with “the vertical abuse of the Supper.” See also Dunn, Theology of Paul, 599–623. 668. Neyrey refers to this as “the social body,” which is the faith community. Neyrey, Paul, In Other Words, 116. Paul presents here a significant dissimilarity with Second Temple Judaism. Paul is the first and only Christian writer to use the term sw/ma Cristou / “body of Christ” in a metaphorical manner to represent the corporate faith community. The notion of the body of Christ or “the body of the Messiah” as a metaphor for the worshipping community is nowhere attested in Second Temple Jewish writings. While the view of a corporate unity is attested in Second Temple Jewish writings such as the image of the building or temple of God and the vineyard (Isa 5:1–7), it is taken cosmically in

NOTES

| 423

Judaism to refer to Israel (Ps.-Philo 12.8–10). The Qumran community also viewed itself as a cosmic plant and building (1QH 6:15). See E. Schweizer, TDNT 7:1071n448. The metaphor of the faith community as “the body of Christ” is also used in Eph 4:12; 5:23. 669. Gingrich and Danker define sune,rcomai as “to come together, assemble, gather,” see Gingrich and Danker, Shorter Lexicon of the Greek New Testament, 192. 670. This is also seen elsewhere: 1 Corinthians 11:17: avlla. eivj to. h-sson sune,rcesqe 1 Corinthians 11:18: sunercome,nwn u`mw/n evn evkklhsi,a| 1 Corinthians 11:20: Sunercome,nwn ou=n u`mw/n 1 Corinthians 11:33: sunerco,menoi eivj to. fagei/n 1 Corinthians 11:34: i[na mh. eivj kri,ma sune,rchsqe 1 Corinthians 14:26: sune,rchsqe e[kastoj yalmo.n e;cei didach.n e;cei avpoka,luyin e;cei . . . Also sunacqe,ntwn u`mw/n / “When you are assembled” (1 Cor 5:4). 671. E. Stauffer, TDNT 1:55. For the one explicit reference to the ෕ࣹඥ›ٗfeast in the NT, see Jude 12; cf. 2 Pet 2:13. In the Patristic writings, see Igantius, Smyrn. 8.2. 672. Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 23.28. Louw and Nida further comment here, “The meaning of avga,ph may be rendered in some languages as ‘meals in which you show your love for one another as you eat together’ or ‘your eating together as the result of your love for one another.’” 673. On the ෕ࣹඥ›ٗ, see B. B. Blue, “Love Feast,” DPL, 578–79; Cross, Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, 23; Everett Ferguson, ABD 1:90–91; Smith, From Symposium to Eucharist, 285–87. According to BDAG, 7, Paul implicitly refers to the love feast in 1 Cor 11:17–34. The separation of the love feast from the Eucharist occurred in the second century CE and is attested by Justin Martyr, 1 Apol. 65–66. See also Tertullian, Apol. 39; Hippolytus, Apost. Trad. Xxvi; Clem. Al., Paed. 2.1.4.; Strom. 3.2. 674. We see this plurality in unity in Paul’s words e]n sw/ma oi` polloi, evsmen (1 Cor 10:17). Although believers are many, they are one body. 675. BDAG, 7 (italics mine). 676. Compare the Eucharist narratives in Mark 14:23; Luke 22:17, 19 where euvcariste,w is also used with the implied referent being God. 677. Marshall, “Lord’s Supper,” DPL, 569–75. 678. Aune, “Worship, Early Christian,” ABD 6:980. 679. Dunn, Theology of Paul, 621. 680. Kuhn comments that a “yearning expectation of the parousia is linked with the Lord’s Supper.” Kuhn, TDNT 4:472. Bradshaw argues that this eschatological theme in the Eucharist was practiced in the “Palestinian [Judean] Christian communities prior to Pauline influence.” Bradshaw, Reconstructing Early Christian Worship, 14. See also Reginald H. Fuller, “The Double Origin of the Eucharist,” Biblical Research 8 (1963): 60–72; A. J. B. Higgins, The Lord’s Supper in the New Testament (London: SCM Press, 1952), 56–63; Eduard Schweizer, The Lord’s Supper According to the New Testament (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1967), 25.

424

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

681. See Did. 10:6. 682. Fitzmyer notes, “I hesitate to find the ending of 1 Corinthians [16:22] reflecting a similar eucharistic situation.” Fitzmyer, To Advance the Gospel, 228. Cullmann, Prayer in the New Testament, 71, 86 was of the opinion that the maranatha prayer was associated with the Eucharist. 683. See LXX Lev 24:7; Wis 16:6. Collins comments, “To remember God’s saving events in the past was to remember God himself.” Collins, First Corinthians, 428. 684. N. T. Wright, The New Testament and the People of God (London: SPCK, 1992), 448 (italics mine).

Chapter Six: The Purpose and Ultimate Goal of Worship in Paul 1. See sec. 3.1.2. in chap. 5. 2. Ralph P. Martin, An Early Christian Confession (London: The Tyndale Press, 1960), 7. 3. The majority of scholars hold that the Carmen is pre-Pauline. J.  N.  D. Kelly, Early Christian Creeds (London: Longmans, 1960), 18; Marshall, Origins of New Testament Christology, 106; J. Sanders, “Dissenting Deities and Phil, 2:1–11,” JBL 88 (1968): 279–90. On a demurring position of the Carmen Christi being a pre-Pauline hymn, see Fee, To What End Exegesis? 173–91; Kümmel, Introduction to the New Testament, 334–35. A number of scholars are also persuaded that the Carmen was originally written in Aramaic. Kelly notes, “So far from being Pauline, it is almost certainly an ancient Christian hymn, probably of Palestinian [Judean] derivation, which was already arranged in rhythmic strophes by the time it fell into St. Paul’s hands.” Kelly, Early Christian Creeds, 18. Fee agrees with the Semitic origins of the Carmen, that “it contains nothing at all of the nature of Greek hymndody or poetry. Therefore, it must be Semitic in origin.” Fee, To What End Exegesis? 175. Also see Marshall, Origins of New Testament Christology, 106; Hurtado, One God, One Lord, 102; Cullmann, Earliest Christian Confessions, 22n4. For a conjectural Aramaic rendering of the Carmen Christi, see Fitzmyer, According to Paul, 90–101. 4. The use of the relative pronoun o]j is one of the main factors in identifying Phil 2:6–11 as a “hymn.” See Fee, Paul’s Letter to the Philippians, 40–43, 202n37. While Fee rejects that the Carmen as a hymn, most scholars appear to be in agreement that the Carmen is of a hymnic literary genre. Robert J. Reymond, Jesus: Divine Messiah, the New Testament Witness (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1990), 252. The genre of the Carmen is not germane to my research subject on worship in Paul. On the various debates and questions surrounding the text of the Carmen, see Brown, Introduction to the New Testament, 489–93; Fowl, Philippians, 108–17; Bonnie B. Thurston and Judith M. Ryan, Philippians and Philemon (ed. Daniel J. Harrington; SP 10; Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2009), 85–92. 5. Robert Reymond admittedly calls the amount of scholarly work written on the Carmen Christi to be “absolutely staggering.” Reymond, Jesus, 251. On a detailed scholarly

NOTES

6. 7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

| 425

assessment of the Carmen Christi, see Martin, Carmen Christi; Martin, Philippians (NCB; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1976); D. P. Moessner, “Turning Status ‘Upside Down’ in Philippi. Christ Jesus’ ‘Emptying Himself’ as Forfeiting Any Acknowledgment of His ‘Equality with God’ (Phil. 2:6–11),” Horizons in Biblical Theology 31.2 (2009): 123–43; G. F. Hawthorne, Philippians (WBC 43; Waco: Word, 1983), 71–75; M. Rissi, “Der Christushymnus in Phil 2, 6–11,” in Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt: Geschichte und Kultur Roms im Spiegel der neueren Forschung II.25.4 (ed. Hildegard Temporini and Wolfgang Haase; Berlin; New York: W. de Gruyter, 1987): 3314–26; C. F. D. Moule, “Further Reflections on Philippians 2:5–11,” in Apostolic History and the Gospel: Biblical and Historical Essays Presented to F. F. Bruce on His 60th Birthday (ed. Woodrow Ward Gasque and Ralph P. Martin; Exeter: Paternoster, 1970), 265–76; Bockmuehl, Epistle to the Philippians, 119–48; Robert B. Strimple, “Philippians 2:5–11 in Recent Studies: Some Exegetical Conclusions,” Westminster Theological Journal 41 (1979): 247–68; I. Howard Marshall, “The Christ-Hymn in Philippians 2:5–11: A Review Article,” Tyndale Bulletin 19 (1968): 104–27. On the structure of the Carmen as a hymn and its possible original format, see O’Brien, Epistle to the Philippians, 188–93. For an extensive bibliographical listing on the Carmen Christi, see O’Brien, Epistle to the Philippians, 186–88. For an opposing view of the Carmen as a hymn, see Gordon D. Fee, “Philippians 2:5–11: Hymn or Exalted Pauline Prose?” Bulletin for Biblical Research 2 (1992): 29–46. On a historical survey of scholarly approaches to the Carmen Christi, see Nunzio Capizzi, L’Uso Di Fil 2,6–11 Nella Cristologia Contemporanea (1965–1993) (Tesi Gregoriana Serie Teologia 21; Roma: Editrice Pontificia Universitate Gregoriana, 1997). Fee, Paul’s Letter to the Philippians, 195; Bockmuehl, Epistle to the Philippians, 125. For a christological assessmnet of Phil 2:6–8, see Fee, Pauline Christology, 372–93. On the theme of Christian unity in the Carmen Christi, see David Alan Black, “Paul and Christian Unity: A Formal Analysis of Philippians 2:1–4,” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 28.3 (1985): 299–308. Fee prefers to use the phrase “as God.” Fee, Paul’s Letter to the Philippians, 195. Note NIV rendering of Phil 2:6: “Who, being in very nature God.” I will use the direct English translation of morfh/| qeou/ / “form of God.” For a summary of the various views on existing in “the form of God,” see Hawthorne, Philippians, 81–84. Fuller, Foundations of New Testament Christology, 208; Bockmuehl, Epistle to the Philippians, 126; Hawthorne, Philippians, 84. Silva, Philippians, 101; Hurtado, Lord Jesus Christ, 123; Fee, Paul’s Letter to the Philippians, 207; Marshall, Origins of New Testament Christology, 108. Fee, Paul’s Letter to the Philippians, 195. I am fully aware that the Greek text employs the generic words evn o`moiw,mati avnqrw,pwn / “in the likeness of human beings,” and w`j a;nqrwpoj / “as a human being.” I use the word “man” in this case to refer to the man Jesus even though the Greek text employs the generic terms to identify Jesus with all humanity or humankind. See comments in Fee, Paul’s Letter to the Philippians, 213n94; 214n1. Silva, Philippians, 99; O’Brien, Epistle to the Philippians, 228; Fuller, Foundations of New Testament Christology, 209; Cousar, Theology of the Cross, 27; Fee, Pauline Christology, 394.

426

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

12. This has been taken and adapted from Fee, Paul’s Letter to the Philippians, 195–96. See also Thurston and Ryan, Philippians and Philemon, 83. Moessner, “Turning Status ‘Upside Down’ in Philippi,” 134 refers to the preexistent Jesus’ “deliberate act . . . of self-abnegation.” 13. Most exegetes who hold the Carmen to be pre-Pauline maintain that the reference to “death on a cross” is a Pauline addition or gloss. O’Brien, Epistle to the Philippians, 230. See comments in Martin, Carmen Christi, 221. This is not germane to the research and hence I will not address it. 14. O’Brien seems to rightly capture the idea here when he asserts, “Here the rock bottom of Jesus’ humiliation was reached.” O’Brien, Epistle to the Philippians, 230. Martin also correctly notes that “[it] reached the lowest rung of the ladder.” Martin, Carmen Christi, 221. On crucifixion as the punishment for the basest classes of people such as violent criminals or slaves, see Hengel, Crucifixion, 86–90; J. Schneider, TDNT 7:572–84; Bockmuehl, Epistle to the Philippians, 135. It is interesting that Paul speaks of Jesus taking on the form of a slave in Phil 2:7. 15. Bockmuehl, Epistle to the Philippians, 139. 16. The contrast between humiliation and exaltation is similarly echoed in the gospels. In Matt 23:12; Luke 14:11; 18:14, Jesus asserts that “whoever humbles themselves will be exalted,” and conversely “whoever exalts themselves will be humbled.” Sirach 7:11 also states that God is the one who “humbles and exalts” (ga.r o` tapeinw/n kai. avnuyw/n / “there is One who humbles and exalts” (NRSV).). Moessner, “Turning Status ‘Upside Down’ in Philippi,” 139 notes that Phil 2:9–11 is “the exact reversal” of Phil 2:6–8. 17. O’Brien, Epistle to the Philippians, 232. 18. Silva, Philippians, 108; Fee, Pauline Christology, 394. O’Brien translates the opening of Phil 2:9 as “therefore, God for his part.” O’Brien, Epistle to the Philippians, 232. Moessner, “Turning Status ‘Upside Down’ in Philippi,” 140 sees God as the active subject in both parts of the Carmen. 19. Reymond, Jesus, 254. O’Brien calls it a “strong inferential conjunction.” O’Brien, Epistle to the Philippians, 232. 20. The conjunction dio, carries the meaning of “therefore, for this reason.” Gingrich and Danker, Shorter Lexicon of the Greek New Testament, 50. It is also translated “wherefore” (KJV, ASV) and also carries the meaning of “on account of which thing.” See Alexander Souter, A Pocket Lexicon of the New Testament (Great Britain: Clarendon Press, 1953), 66. It also carries the meaning of “this is why.” O’Brien, Epistle to the Philippians, 233. 21. Loh and Nida, Translator’s Handbook on Paul’s Letter to the Philippians, 61. 22. Fee, Paul’s Letter to the Philippians, 221. 23. Fee, Paul’s Letter to the Philippians, 221n19. Fee points this out by showing that the Greek expression is the equivalent of the English word over used in compound words such as overjoyed, overburden, and overdevelop. Also see O’Brien, Epistle to the Philippians, 236. 24. Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, 87.16. 25. Neyrey, Give God the Glory, 130. 26. Neyrey, Give God the Glory, 136 (italics mine). 27. Wright, Resurrection of the Son of God, 232; Bockmuehl, Epistle to the Philippians, 143.

NOTES

| 427

28. Wright, Resurrection of the Son of God, 228. 29. The noun swth,r / savior appears in Phil 3:20. The noun swth,r appears once in Eph 5:23 and frequently appears in the Pastorals of Christ (2 Tim 1:10; Titus 1:4; 2:11, 13; 3:6), but is also used of God (1 Tim 1:1; 2:3; 4:10; Titus 1:3; 2:10; 3:4). 30. Virgil, Ecl. 1.6–8 (Fairclough; Loeb Classical Library). 31. Evans, Ancient Texts for New Testament Studies, 311–12. 32. Fee, Paul’s Letter to the Philippians, 31, 459. 33. See Bockmuehl, Epistle to the Philippians, 143. Was Paul possibly reacting to this move by Caligula? 34. Fee, Paul’s Letter to the Philippians, 31. See also Thurston and Ryan, Philippians and Philemon, 85. Grundmann makes the interesting comment that the Roman emperor Octavian designated himself by the name, “Imperator Caesar Augustus” and that the phrase ku,rioj VIhsou/j Cristo.j in Phil 2:11 “has a similar ring” to it. W. Grundmann, TDNT 9:542. Paul, however, wrote Philippians under the reign of Nero (54 CE–68 CE), not Octavian (63 BCE–14 CE). Nero as emperor also took the title of Caesar. See Fee, Paul’s Letter to the Philippians, 31–32, 36. Paul refers in Phil 4:22 to oi` evk th/j Kai,saroj oivki,aj / “those of Caesar’s household” (RSV) who in this case would be Nero. This is the only place in the Pauline letters where Caesar is mentioned, and it is significant that it is in Philippians where some scholars see an anti-imperial polemic. See comments in Fee, Paul’s Letter to the Philippians, 459–60. 35. Ps 18:46; 21:13; 46:10; 57:5, 11; 118:28. YHWH is also said to exalt the righteous (Ps 37:34; 75:10) and the Davidic king as “the highest of the kings of the earth” (Ps 89:17–21). 36. Among the names that have been suggested as “the name above every name” are (1) Jesus, (2) Jesus Christ (3) Son, (4) God, and (5) Lord. O’Brien, Epistle to the Philippians, 237. 37. Thurston and Ryan, Philippians and Philemon, 83. 38. John J. Collins, “The Epistle to the Philippians,” in A Commentary on the New Testament (Washington, DC: Catholic Biblical Association, 1942), 551. 39. Fee, Paul’s Letter to the Philippians, 221–22; Hengel, Studies in Early Christology, 155–56; Capes, Old Testament Yahweh Texts in Paul’s Christology, 148; Martin, Early Christian Confession, 35; O’Brien, Epistle to the Philippians, 233, 238; Fowl, Philippians, 102; Moessner, “Turning Status ‘Upside Down’ in Philippi,” 141n57; Barclay, Letters to Philippians, Colossians and Thessalonians, 48; Stanley, Apostolic Church in the New Testament, 106; Craddock, Philippians, 41; Lightfoot, Saint Paul’s Epistle to the Philippians, 114. C. F. D. Moule, however, takes the name above every name to be “Jesus,” although he admits his position is against “all the weight of opinion to the contrary.” Moule, “Further Reflections on Philippians 2:5–11,” 270; Bockmuehl, Epistle to the Philippians, 142. The difficulty with Moule’s position is that it assumes that the name above every name is “Jesus” and that it was given to him at the exaltation. The difficulty lies in the fact that the name “Jesus” was the name that the Son already had in his earthly ministry as even Paul acknowledges when he rehearses the words of institution at the Eucharist (1 Cor 11:23). However, Paul also calls him “the Lord Jesus” here prior to his resurrection. Luke seems to have the same tension wherein he calls Jesus “Lord” (Luke 2:11; 6:46; 7:13; 10:1, 41;

428

40. 41. 42.

43. 44.

45. 46. 47.

48. 49. 50. 51.

52.

53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 61.

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

11:39; 12:42; 13:15; 17:6; 18:6; 22:61; 24:34) and “Messiah” or “Christ” (Luke 2:11) before his resurrection and then states that God made Jesus both “Lord” and “Messiah” following the resurrection and ascension (Acts 2:36). It seems that what the resurrection/exaltation entailed was the official declaration of Jesus’ lordship and messiahship. Fuller, Foundations of New Testament Christology, 230. Fee, Paul’s Letter to the Philippians, 221n20. Fee notes that throughout Isa 41–55 the name by which God identifies himself by is hw"ßhy> (MT) / ku,rioj (LXX). According to Isa 42:8, evgw. ku,rioj o` qeo,j tou/to, mou, evstin to. o;noma th.n do,xan mou e`te,rw| ouv dw,sw  / “I am the Lord God, that is my name. I will not give my glory to another.” Fee, Paul’s Letter to the Philippians, 222n25. By the early third century CE, Origen had already noted the connection between Isa 45:23 and Phil 2:10–11. Origen, Or., 31.3. Cousar, Theology of the Cross, 27. Wallace, Basics of New Testament Syntax, 206 (italics in original). Also see O’Brien, Epistle to the Philippians, 239; Thurston and Ryan, Philippians and Philemon, 84. In Jewish and pagan thought, both “purpose and result are identical in declarations of the divine will.” BAGD, s.v., “ i[na,” 378.II.2. O’Brien, Epistle to the Philippians, 238–39. Thurston and Ryan, Philippians and Philemon, 84. Thurston and Ryan, Philippians and Philemon, 84. Bockmuehl similarly states that the tripartite cosmos is the “conventional description of the universe.” Bockmuehl, Epistle to the Philippians, 145. Loh and Nida, Translator’s Handbook on Paul’s Letter to the Philippians, 63. See sec. 4.1.1. in chap. 4. Martin, Carmen Christi, 265. Thurston and Ryan, Philippians and Philemon, 84. These subjects to the lordship of Jesus are seen as including both Christian believers and unbelievers. See the discussion in O’Brien, Epistle to the Philippians, 243–50; Martin, Carmen Christi, xxv–xxix. Loh and Nida. Translator’s Handbook on Paul’s Letter to the Philippians, 63. See also Fee, Pauline Christology, 398; Lightfoot, Saint Paul’s Epistle to the Philippians, 115; Alfred Plummer, A Commentary on St. Paul’s Epistle to the Philippians (London: Robert Scott Roxburghe House Paternoster Row, 1919), 48. Fowl, Philippians, 103 (italics mine). Martin, Carmen Christi, 265. Martin also speaks of the “eschatological homage” that will be given to the exalted Jesus. Martin, Carmen Christi, xxvii. Martin, Worship in the Early Church, 31. Conybeare and Howson, Life and Epistles of St. Paul, 729. O’Brien, Epistle to the Philippians, 240 (italics mine). O’Brien, Epistle to the Philippians, 238. Fee, Pauline Christology, 398. Hurtado, Lord Jesus Christ, 112–13. Hurtado, One God, One Lord, 11–12. Hurtado seems to use “devotion” as synonymous with “worship” as he also refers to “devotion to God” (ibid. 11).

NOTES

| 429

62. Aune, “Worship, Early Christian,” ABD 6:974. 63. Dunn, Theology of Paul, 260, 264. 64. On the Second Council of Nicea and the debate over the terms latreai, dulia, and hyperdulia, see the word entries in Cross, Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, 426, 672, 789. See also Petro B. T. Bilaniuk, Studies in Eastern Christianity (Munich-Toronto: Our Canada Publications, 1983), 3:8. 65. See especially James D.  G. Dunn, Did the First Christians Worship Jesus? The New Testament Evidence (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2010). 66. Dunn, Did the First Christians Worship Jesus? 28. 67. Dunn, Did the First Christians Worship Jesus? 151. 68. Charles B. Cousar, Philippians and Philemon: A Commentary (New Testament Library; Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2009), 58. Bauckham comments: “[T]he role which Jesus played in the Christian religion from the beginning was such as to cause him to be treated as God in worship.” Bauckham, “Jesus, Worship of” ABD 3:815. 69. Daniel B. Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996), 474. 70. Bauckham, “The Worship of Jesus in Philippians 2:9–11,” 128–39. 71. Loh and Nida, Translator’s Handbook on Paul’s Letter to the Philippians, 62. 72. Bockmuehl, Epistle to the Philippians, 145. 73. Bockmuehl, Epistle to the Philippians, 148. 74. Delling, Worship in the New Testament, 106. 75. Neil Richardson, Paul’s Language about God (Sheffield, UK: Sheffield Academic Press, 1994), 285. 76. Collins and Collins, King and Messiah as Son of God, 174n105. 77. Ernst Lohmeyer, Der Brief an die Philipper, an die Kolosser und an Philemon (ed. W. Schmauch; 11th ed.; Kritisch-exegetischer Kommentar über das Neue Testament; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1930; repr., 1956), 97n4. 78. Martin, Early Christian Confession, 7. 79. See sec. 1.3. of chap. 2. 80. Delling, Worship in the New Testament, 106. 81. Fowl, Philippians, 103n36; O’Brien, Epistle to the Philippians, 239. 82. Fowl, Philippians, 103n36. 83. O’Brien, Epistle to the Philippians, 239–40. 84. O’Brien, Epistle to the Philippians, 240. 85. Loh and Nida, Translator’s Handbook on Paul’s Letter to the Philippians, 62. 86. See also Bockmuehl, Epistle to the Philippians, 145. 87. See O’Brien, Epistle to the Philippians, 240. 88. O. Hofius, Der Christushymnus Philipper 2,6–11: Untersuchungen zu Gestalt und Aussage eines urchristlichen Psalms (WUNT 1/17; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1976), 41–42. Moessner, “Turning Status ‘Upside Down’ in Philippi,” 139 underlines the cosmic dimension of every knee bowing and every tongue confessing to the exalted Jesus as Lord by referring to this act as coming from “the entire universe,” which he identifies as “every status of being.”

430

|

WORSHIP AND THE RISEN JESUS IN THE PAULINE LETTERS

89. On Rom 11:4, see Moo, Epistle to the Romans, 676; Dodd, Epistle of Paul to the Romans, 174–75; Sanday and Headlam, Epistle to the Romans, 311–12; Dunn, Theology of Paul, 521. 90. See sec. 4.1.1. in chap. 4 and sec. 2.1. in chap. 5. 91. OT Scripture passages in which bowing is an expression of worship to God in a religious context: Exod 4:31; 2 Kgs 17:36; 2 Chr 29:30; Neh 8:6; Ps 5:7; 86:9; 95:6; 138:2; Mic 6:6; Zeph 2:11. 92. Note Exod 20:4–5 (cf. Deut 5:8–9), which says, “You shall not make for yourself an idol, whether in the form of anything that is in heaven above, or that is on the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. 5 You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I the LORD your God am a jealous God” (NRSV). 93. But note LXX 1 Chr 29:20, which says, kai. ei=pen Dauid pa,sh| th/| evkklhsi,a| euvlogh,sate ku,rion to.n qeo.n u`mw/n kai. euvlo,ghsen pa/sa h` evkklhsi,a ku,rion to.n qeo.n tw/n pate,rwn auvtw/n kai. ka,myantej ta. go,nata proseku,nhsan tw/| kuri,w| kai. tw/| basilei/ / “And David said to the whole congregation, ‘Bless the Lord our God.’ And all the congregation blessed the Lord God of their fathers, and they bowed the knee and worshipped the Lord and the king.” The latter phrase kai. ka,myantej ta. go,nata proseku,nhsan tw/| kuri,w| kai. tw/| basilei / has been variously translated “and worshipped the Lord, and the king”(KJV), “and paid homage to the Lord and to the king” (ESV cf. NASB, NJB), “and prostrating themselves before the Lord and before the king” (NAB), “and stretched out flat on the ground before the Lord and the king” (NET). Interestingly, the RSV translates it “and worshiped the Lord, and did obeisance to the king.” The word “obeisance” in this case has been added or supplied by the translators. The LXX text clearly shows that the one word proseku,nhsan modifies both tw/| kuri,w| kai. tw/| basilei/ / “the Lord and the king.” Here proseku,nhsan seems to be doing double duty, and this text demonstrates the fluidity of proskune,w. It can refer to both divine and human referents as this text clearly shows. However, while proskune,w is used of both YHWH and the king in 1 Chr 29:20, in the following verse (1 Chr 29:21), it goes on to show that David sacrificed to YHWH, a cultic act which was a unique expression of worship or religious service to YHWH only. This act was not to be performed to the king but to YHWH alone by the Israelites. See comments in Hurtado, At the Origins of Christian Worship, 68. 94. As in the act of bowing to superiors (Gen 27:29; 41:43; 43:28; 49:8) or to the king (1 Kgs 1:31; Ps 45:11; 72:9). 95. Loh and Nida, Translator’s Handbook on Paul’s Letter to the Philippians, 62. 96. Loh and Nida, Translator’s Handbook on Paul’s Letter to the Philippians, 46; O’Brien, Epistle to the Philippians, 246; Martin, Carmen Christi, 271; Plummer, Commentary on St. Paul’s Epistle to the Philippians, 48–49. 97. Neyrey, Give God the Glory, 37 (italics in original). 98. O’Brien, Epistle to the Philippians, 246. 99. O’Brien, Epistle to the Philippians, 246. 100. Thayer, New Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon, 224. 101. Plummer, Commentary on St. Paul’s Epistle to the Philippians, 49.

NOTES

| 431

102. O’Brien, Epistle to the Philippians, 247. 103. O’Brien, Epistle to the Philippians, 248. 104. O’Brien, Epistle to the Philippians, 246–47; Hofius, Der Christushymnus Philipper 2,6–11, 37–40; Plummer, Commentary on St. Paul’s Epistle to the Philippians, 49; Lightfoot, Saint Paul’s Epistle to the Philippians, 115. 105. Hurtado, At the Origins of Christian Worship, 81; Hofius, Der Christushymnus Philipper 2,6–11, 67. 106. Bockmuehl, Epistle to the Philippians, 146–47. 107. O’Brien, Epistle to the Philippians, 239. 108. Craddock, Philippians, 42. 109. O’Brien, Epistle to the Philippians, 241. See also Hofius, Der Christushymnus Philipper 2,6–11, 122; Lightfoot, Saint Paul’s Epistle to the Philippians, 114. In Phil 2:10–11, however, while Paul is alluding to Isa 45:23 he alters the verbs so that they are no longer future but are now subjunctives: ka,myh| and evxomologh,shtai. The notable change here by Paul is further attested with the scribal tendency to change the subjunctive evxomologh,shtai to the future indicative evxomologh,setai as attested in the majority of MSS. Fee, Paul’s Letter to the Philippians, 218n2. This tendency may be due to attempting to harmonize Phil 2:11 with Rom 14:11 and Isa 45:23, both of which have the future indicative. Metzger also admits that the future indicative appears to be an assimilation to the future indicative found in Isa 45:23. Metzger, Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, 546. Both Metzger and Fee accept the subjunctive reading to be preferred as the original as it is attested in î46 a B y 104 323 2495 pm. In relation to the reading in LXX Isa 45:23, the use of the subjunctives in Phil 2:10–11 represents the harder reading. Fowl, Philippians, 103n39 notes that both the aorist subjunctive and the future indicative “can be used to express an action occurring in the future.” 110. The MT of Isa 45:23 reads similarly, !Avl'-lK' [b;V'Ti %r