Were the Opponents at Philippi Necessarily Jewish?
Yüklə 221,58 Kb.
|
|
Bibliotheca Sacra 155 (January-March 1998) 39-61. Copyright © 1998 by Dallas Theological Seminary. Cited with permission. WERE THE OPPONENTS AT PHILIPPI NECESSARILY JEWISH? Herbert W. Bateman IV Paul's allusion in Philippians to a group or groups of oppo- nents has resulted in a myriad of suggestions. "One of the most hotly debated issues in the contemporary study of Philippians is that of the nature and identity of the opponents to whom Paul al- ludes in his letter."1 Some suggest the opponents (or at least one group of opponents) were Jews who went to Philippi in order to "reconvert" Gentile Christians.2 Most writers, however, contend they were Jewish Christian missionaries whose mission was to influence Gentile Christians to adopt Jewish rituals.3 Yet should
College and Seminary, Winona Lake, Indiana. 1 Peter T. O'Brien, The Epistle to the Philippians (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1991), 26-27. Similar sentiments are expressed by Fee, who observed that "the sec- ondary literature on this issue is second only to the huge output on 2:6-11" (Gordon D. Fee, Paul's Letter to the Philippians, New International Commentary on the New Testament [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995], 7).
York: Harper, 1959], 3-4, 100-102). Peter Richardson suggests they were Jews from Thessalonica (Israel in the Apostolic Church [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1969], 111-17). The Jews in Acts, however, are generally depicted as perse- cuting Christians, not reconverting or proselytizing them, especially in Thessa- lonica (17:5-9; cf. 9:1-3). Yet this is not to deny Jewish "missionary" activity. The in- crease of the Jewish population seems to argue that some form of proselytizing was taking place (Salo W. Baron, A Social and Religious History of the Jews [New York: Columbia University Press, 1952], 1:370-72). Also see A. F. J. Klijn, "Paul's Opponents in Philippians iii," Novum Testamentum 7 (1965): 278-84; Ernst Lohmeyer, Der Brief an die Philipper (Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1974), 124-26, 153; and Gerald F. Hawthorne, Philippians, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas, TX: Word, 1983), xliv-xlvii, 122-23.
lem Church [who] with variations in nuance continued to post . . . a settled and persistent ‘other’ gospel" (Earle E. Ellis, "Paul and His Opponents," in Christian-
1975], 264-98, esp. 298; 280-81, 291-92, 298). Also see R. C. H. Lenski, The Interpreta- tion of St. Paul's Epistles to the Galatians, to the Ephesians, and to the Philippi- 40 BIBLIOTHECA SACRA / January—March 1998 these opponents—who are typically called "Judaizers"—be lim- ited to Jewish Christians or perhaps even non-Christian Jewish "missionaries"? Is it possible that they were merely local Gen- tiles who sympathized with and practiced Judaistic rituals? THE PEOPLE OF PHILIPPI Located about ten miles from the Aegean Sea on the eastern end of the Via Egnatia, Philippi is identified as a Macedonian city (Makedoni a Greek settlement known as Krenides (from krhnh and under Thracian control.4 In his quest to strengthen Macedo- nia's situation in the east, Philip II (Alexander the Great's father)
managed to seize control of the flourishing Greek gold-mining town of Krenides. After he drove the Thracian ruler Ketriporis
from the city, Philip promptly repopulated Krenides with Mace- donians, renamed the city Philippi, and incorporated the city into
his ever-growing Macedonian state in 356 B.C.5 Thus Philippi's earliest history indicates that it was a Greek city-state, populated
by Greeks.6 Delachaux & Niestle, 1973), 28–30, 110; O'Brien, The Epistle to the Philippians; 33; Moises Silva, Philippians, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament
(Grand Rapids: Baker, 1992), 3–5, 168–71; Mikael Tellbe, "The Sociological Factors behind Philippians 3:1–11 and the Conflict at Philippi," Journal for the Study of
293–97.
sixth century B.C. Paros initially colonized Thasos, a large island in the north Aegean Sea, which in turn secured gold and silver settlements on the mainland.
These mainland settlements, however, were not without struggles against the warlike Thracians. Krenides was one such settlement (Strabo, Geography 7.34;
Diodorus, Bibliotheca Historica 16.3.7; Michael Grant and Rachel Kitzinger, eds., Charles Scribner's Sons, 1988], 215; Oswyn Murray, Early Greece, 2d ed. [Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1993], 102–23, esp. 115–17).
of the Pangaion mining area, died, his children divided their father's kingdom among themselves. Ketriporis received the Greek gold-mining town of Krenides.
However, a dispute arose between Ketriporis and the people of Krenides. Erring- ton describes how "Philip executed his program of aid for Krenides with his usual
uncompromising persistence" (R. Malcolm Errington, A History of Macedonia [Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1990], 45–48; cf. Paul Collart,
ing their early expansion activities on Thasos. After the colony was established, however, the practice was discouraged or prohibited (Murray, Early Greece, 115).
If this is true, it may explain Thracian carvings of the so-called Thracian Horse- Were the Opponents at Philippi Necessarily Jewish? 41
190 years, Rome's aggressive activities in the east eventually terminated Macedonia's autonomy. After the Battle of Pydna
(Third Macedonian War) in 168 B.C., Rome dismantled the Macedonian state and eventually annexed Macedonia as a Ro-
man province in 148 B.C.7 With its gold mines exhausted, Philippi's population declined to a small Greek settlement. How-
ever, because of circumstances in Rome, Philippi eventually rose to a place of prominence as a Roman city. Octavian and Antony,
who desired to avenge the assassination of Julius Caesar (on March 19, 44 B.C.), pursued and defeated Cassius and Brutus
(Julius Caesar's assassins) on the plains of Philippi in 42 B.C.8 As a result of this victory, Octavian refounded Philippi as a military
colony, repopulated it with retired veterans, and named it Colonia B.C., Octavian further colonized Philippi with veterans, this time discharged veterans from Antony's army, and renamed the city
ignated August, he once again lengthened Philippi's name— citizenship on the people of Philippi.9 Thus Octavian (Augustus) on the acropolis—a hill near Philippi that served as an open-air shrine for pagan cults. Abrahamsen suggests that Thrace "deeply influenced Philippi's religious
development" (Valerie Abrahamsen, "Christianity and the Rock Reliefs at Philippi," Biblical Archaeologist 51 [March 1988]: 46-56). Perhaps this influence
began on Thasos and was transported to Krenides when Thasian Greeks expanded to the mainland. Regardless of these archaeological findings, Philippi was a Greek-
speaking, Greek-populated, Greek-cultured city-state. Although Macedonia functioned as an independent Greek state after the Second Macedonian War, the Battle of Cynoscephalae in 197 B.C. led to Macedonia's becom-
ing a Roman province. Errington contends, "The external spheres of dominion and influence that had turned Macedonia into a great power had been abolished, and
the Romans took care that they were never reestablished" (Errington, A History of Collart, Philippes, 191-219. the military colonies for veterans and civilian settlers. Paul visited and estab- lished churches in five such military colonies: Pisidian Antioch (Acts 13:13-50),
Lystra (14:4-20), and Troas in Asia Minor (16:8-11; 20:6-12; 2 Tim. 4:13); Corinth in Achaia (Acts 18:1-18); and Philippi in Macedonia (16:11-40). See A. N. Sherwin-
White, Roman Society and Roman Law in the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1963), 176-78. During New Testament times Roman citizenship outside of
Rome was rare. Even Caracalla's extended Roman citizenship in A.D. 212 was lim- ited to male free (nonslave) people (Chris Scarre, Chronicles of the Roman Em-
Thames & Hudson, 19951, 136-46, esp. 146). For archaeological discussions see Col- 42 BIBLIOTHECA SACRA / January-March 1998
municipality with significant rights and privileges granted only to Roman citizens (i.e., it possessed lex Italicum). In essence
Philippi was a Greco-Roman city with clout. By the time Paul came to Philippi in A.D. 50/51 the city was
populated by both Greeks and Romans. In fact the few people Scripture specifically mentions in connection with the Philippian
church had Greek (Lydia, Acts 16:14-15; Euodia and Syntyche, Phil. 4:2) and Roman (Clement, Phil. 4:2) names. Although the
"frequent theme of Acts," might support Schwartz's claim that "Paul's accusers in Philippi are Jewish not Gentile,"10 Acts
clearly indicates that no significant Jewish population existed in Philippi. When Paul, Silas, Timothy, and Luke arrived at
Philippi, they went outside the city gate to the Gangites River, where they expected to find a "place of prayer" (proseuxh<, Acts
16:13a).11 Traditionally ten men were needed to establish a syna- gogue (Pirke Abot 3.7). Philippi's Jewish population, however,
seems to have been unique in that it consisted of women only; Luke wrote that he and the others spoke "to the women who had as-
sembled" at the place of prayer (16:13b). Thus the Jewish popula- tion at Philippi was not only scanty in number,12 but also it seems
tions," Annual of the British School at Athens 23 (1918–19): 94–97. reasons in support of this. (1) "Acts frequently shows born Jews, who are now Christians, practicing and teaching non-Jewish practices (and beliefs)—and at
times attacked by Jews for doing so" (Acts 4:1–3; 5:17–18; 6:8–14; 7:52, 57–58; 8:1–4; 9:1–2, 23; 12:3; 13:6–8, 45, 50; 14:19; 17:5, 13; 18:6, 12; 19:9; 20:3; 21:11, 27; 22:22; 23:12–15,
30; 28:19). (2) "Conversion to Christianity was not forbidden by law until the mid- second century, well after both the incident and the composition of Acts." (3) Paul
and Silas were charged with teaching Christianity, not Judaism (1 Thess. 2:2). Con- sequently Schwartz suggests translating Acts 16:20–21 in the following manner:
"And they brought them to the magistrates, saying: ‘Although they are Jews ( ]Ioudai?oi u[pa they are teaching practices which are unlawful for us (i.e., Jews) to accept or do, be- ing Romans'" (Daniel R. Schwartz, "The Accusation and the Accusers at Philippi,"
matically possible, the historical and immediate context does not support his translation. In addition Gentile insurrection against Paul in Philippi is not an iso-
lated event in Acts, as Schwartz suggests. Gentile insurrection occurred in Eph- esus (16:23–34) and insulting Gentile reaction against Paul occurred in Athens
(17:18, 32). tends that "it is strange that the author then says ou$ e]nomi posed there was a place of prayer.' It is even stranger," he continues, "that only
women were there" (Hans Conzelmann, Acts of the Apostles, Hermeneia [Philadelphia: Fortress, 1987], 130).
may perhaps in some degree ascribe the unswerving allegiance of this church to Were the Opponents at Philippi Necessarily Jewish? 43
gogue or large population of Jews existed in Philippi. Before Paul's visit, Philippi was composed of Greek and
Roman Gentiles, with some Jewish women, and at least one woman, Lydia, who was a God-fearer or "worshiper of God"
(sebome gogue, the presence of a small Jewess population, or the mention
of only Gentile conversions in Acts 16 does not eliminate the pos- sibility that Paul's opponents there were Jewish. Nevertheless it
helps to know that historical reconstructions are necessary to support Jewish ethnicity of the opponents typically referred to as
Judaizers. Two reconstructions are noted. One reconstruction is that Jewish missionaries followed
Paul to either "reconvert" or to further convert Gentile Chris- tians. However, the Jews in Acts are depicted as following Paul
not to reconvert or proselytize Christians but to persecute them (14:19; 17:5-9; cf. 9:1-3). In addition Jewish Christian Judaizers,
whose supposed mission was to follow Paul and "further convert" Gentile churches, seem to have limited their appearances to
Galatia, Corinth, and Philippi. Why? Why not Ephesus and Colossae as well? Also lexical parallels frequently made with
Galatians and 2 Corinthians to support the Jewish Judaizer view- point13 overlook the different tones and emphases that exist be-
tween Philippians, Galatians,14 and 2 Corinthians.15 Rapids: Zondervan, 1953], 53). Also see Robert C. Tannehill, The Narrative Unity of F. F. Bruce, The Book of Acts, New International Commentary on the New Testa- ment (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1984), 331.
Corinthians with Philippians in an attempt to identify Paul's opponents as Jewish. See Ellis, "Paul and His Opponents," 264–98; Fee, Paul's Letter to the Philippians,
294–97; and O'Brien, The Epistle to the Philippians, 355–56. as "a threat to the spiritual condition of his converts" (6:12) and "if legal obedience were a method of salvation, the death of Jesus was unnecessary (Gal. 2:20–21 [sic] )"
(Thomas D. Lea, "Unscrambling the Judaizers: Who Were Paul's Opponents?" opposers were not a threat to the spiritual condition of the saints in Philippi nor was their method of salvation based on obedience to the Law. It seems that despite
their motivation for preaching Christ, Paul rejoiced in that Christ was being preached (Phil. 1:15–18); mentioning the opponents' eternal doom, Paul encouraged
the saints to maintain an unwavering and unified stance against them (1:27–28); and Paul used them as an object lesson to encourage the community to avoid mixing
the ritualistic practices of Judaism with Christianity (3:2). Thus differences in tone mitigate against identifying the opponents in Philippians with those in Gala-
tians.
merely addressed a potential problem. It is argued that Paul, though absent at the time of his writing, prepared the Philippians
for a potential conflict with Jewish Christian Judaizers.16 Yet Paul's letters usually, if not always, addressed real—not poten-
tial—problems that required immediate instruction or guidance. Thus with these and similar reconstructions many writers con-
clude that the opponents in Philippi were mission-minded Jews— whether propagandists, Christian, or Gnostic17—who followed
Paul and sought to supplant his message. A third historical reconstruction less frequently argued is
that the opponents were “Gentile Judaizers.”18 Perhaps a group of professing Christians existed in Philippi who entertained Jewish
practices (e.g., circumcision), but they were Gentiles and hence were local Gentile Judaizers. This suggestion raises several
questions. How could a Gentile be circumcised or observe Jewish means precise." After noting the fact that Paul was not on the defensive in Philip- pians and his apostleship was not in dispute as it was in 2 Corinthians, Garland
points out that "there is no hint of circumcision in 2 Corinthians; nor is there any hint in Philippians that the church has fallen prey to intruders (see 2 Cor. 11:4) or
that they would even be received sympathetically" (David E. Garland, "The Compo- sition and Unity of Philippians," Novum Testamentum 27 [1985]: 141-73, esp. 168, n.
94). In fact 2 Corinthians 10–13 is more of an apologetic against clear accusations. Again differences in tone mitigate against identifying the opponents in Philippi
with those in Corinth. formed," Lightfoot supposes, "of some fresh attempt of the Judaizers in the metropolis to thwart and annoy him. What if they should interfere at Philippi as
they were doing at Rome, and tamper with the faith and loyalty of his converts? With this thought weighing on his spirit he resumes his letter" (St. Paul's Epistle
to the Philippians, 69–70). Fee argues, "There is no suggestion in the text that they (i.e. ‘[apparently] Jewish Christians’) are actually present in Philippi" (Fee,
of perfectionism that was part of a "radicalized spiritualistic eschatology" (Helmut Koester, "The Purpose of the Polemic of a Pauline Fragment," New Testament Stud-
[Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982], 22-34, 124–26). Holladay agrees but refers to their eschatology as an "over-realized eschatology" (Carl R. Holladay, "Paul's Opponents
in Philippians 3," Restoration Quarterly 12 [1969]: 77–90). Also see Joseph B. Tyson, "Paul's Opponents at Philippi," Perspectives 3 (1976): 82-95. For a discus-
sion of the weaknesses of this view see O'Brien, The Epistle to the Philippians, 27- 29, and Chris L. Mearns, "The Identity of Paul's Opponents at Philippi," New Tes-
ritual circumcision in a manner which Paul regarded as outrageous and shameful" (Kenneth Grayston, "The Opponents in Philippians 3," Expository Times 97 [March
1986]: 170-72). Were the Opponents at Philippi Necessarily Jewish? 45
however, that circumcision is not the sine qua non for Gentile conversion. Nor is the observance of Jewish rituals an indication
of one's proselytism. If this is true, then what in antiquity differ- entiated a Jewish sympathizer or semi-Jew from a Jewish prose-
lyte?
The pervasive influence of Judaism throughout the Mediter-
ranean during the first century cannot be ignored easily. On the one hand Josephus lauded Judaism's influence in the Mediter-
ranean area. "The masses have long since shown a keen desire to adopt our religious observances; and there is not one city,
Greek or barbarian, nor a single nation, to which our custom of abstaining from work on the seventh day has not spread, and [in
Yüklə 221,58 Kb. Dostları ilə paylaş:
|