Pax Romana — the key to understanding Revelation
You may think that the book of Revelation in the Bible or the Pax Romana in Ancient Rome has nothing to do with your life today. You are wrong, and here is why.
Pax Romana
Pax Romana, which means “Roman Peace”, refers to a period from 27 BC to 192 AD or a little later and describes the situation of:
- few civil wars and a strong empire
- high prosperity (for most)
- flourishing art and culture
- (but it was also a time of persecution of Christians under Nero, Domitian and Trajan, although the systematic persecutions began in 253 AD)
The idea was this:
- The gods have chosen Rome
- Rome and the emperors are the agents of the will, the salvation and the presence of the gods.
- The blessings of the gods (security, peace, justice, wealth, fertility, etc.) are available to all who submit to Rome as their ruler.
- The Pax Romana is the longed for “Golden Age”.
- Therefore, the emperor is worthy of worship, loyalty, and equal titles as a god.
The downside was that this golden age was created by violence, oppression and pacification and was only golden for a few.
The Pax Romana was propagated by:
- Works of art by people like Virgil or Epidictus
- impressive processions
- games
- statues
- coins
- a constant and overwhelming presence; it was the center of all cultural activities
Therefore, it was present in entertainment, at work, in the market, even during meals. And everyone made sure that the entire community/city did not lose the favor of the emperor due to the bad behavior of individuals.
Many cities (especially in Asia Minor, where the letters in Revelation were written) competed to build temples in honor of the emperor and the gods and to spread the Pax Romana. By doing so, they hoped to receive support from the emperor or at least a reduction in taxes.
Pax Romana and Christians
For the Christians, there were several serious problems:
- Jesus was their emperor (king of kings), especially since the gospels are written as euangeleon (the proclamation of a new emperor).
- They received provision from Jesus and did not rely on the emperor.
- Some of the activities associated with the Pax Romana were against their beliefs (e.g. orgies as part of corporate activities).
- Also, the means of “pacifying” the Roman Empire could not be reconciled with Christian beliefs.
- They were accused of being intolerant because they said there was only one God, while the Roman Empire accepted all additional gods.
It was easy to conform (at least outwardly).
As a result, they had three choices:
- Completely deny your faith, because as part of the Roman Empire you can only have one master, Jesus or the emperor.
- live out your faith fully and, in doing so risk social and economic isolation and ruin, imprisonment and even death.
- outwardly conform (confess the emperor with your mouth) but inwardly remain faithful to Jesus (confess him with your heart). However, this makes your faith hypocritical.
The third option has been very compelling to many people and is a major theme in the book of Revelation. With the aspect of an apocalypse there are only two options — all for God or all against him. So, the book of Revelation creates a counter-propaganda against the Pax Romana.
Christians and Jews
The Jews were another source of conflict. Because of their long religious tradition, they were allowed to continue to practice their faith as long as it did not conflict with the Pax Romana — for example, they could celebrate Shabbat and carry out their temple activities.
But now there was this Jewish sect, the Christians, who were not only disregarding the Pax Romana but were also converting many others throughout the Empire to do the same.
Therefore, the Roman Empire punished the Jews. This made the Jews search for reasons to accuse the Christians of trespassing, so that they (the Jews) could continue to practice Judaism.
This was hard on the Christians, and the book of Revelation also addresses this issue.
Jews in Revelation
The book is about one thing: Jesus and everything decided about him. It is the same with the Jews.
In the first part we saw that there was tension between Christians and Jews. This is also clearly the case in Smyrna and Philadelphia, where they attacked the church that witnessed for Jesus. As a result, these Jews were called the synagogue of Satan. When it says that the Jews in Philadelphia later bowed down to the Church there, it means that they accepted Jesus, not that they submitted to the Church.
Also in chapter 11, the place where the two witnesses are killed, it is spiritually described as Sodom (place of sin) and Egypt (place of slavery), this is a description of Jerusalem (because Jesus, their Lord, was killed there). Here even the name is avoided.
Throughout the book of Revelation, the relationship to ethnic Israel is not mentioned (depending on your reading of the 144,000 in chapter 7), only the relationship to Jesus.
On the other hand, the Church is part of Israel, and there are clear statements that describe a unity of Jews and Christians, e.g. the 24 elders in chapter 4 representing the 12 tribes and the 12 apostles, or the names of the 12 tribes and the 12 apostles engraved in the New Jerusalem.
Also, heaven is not described as a neutral place, but as the New Jerusalem. It would not be surprising at all if Jesus were to appear in the physical Jerusalem at His second coming.
Why is there such a controversial statement about the Jews? Because the church is part of Israel and therefore cannot cut off its roots, even though some Jews openly attack the Church.
Conclusion
The challenge for the Church is to deal with the tension between being part of Israel and being attacked by Israel.
I think we can learn a lot from this book about how we deal with each other in different church denominations or with Jews.
Take away
Here are some questions for reflection:
- How is the Pax Romana being articulated today? What happens when someone disagrees?
- Who/what do you see as the source of your good life? From whom/what do you expect the solution to the problems in your life or the orientation in your life?
- How do you react when this conflicts with being “politically correct”?
- How do you threaten other people who disagree with you?
- Do you feel the need to pretend in certain areas of your life? Why? What would happen if you didn’t pretend?
- If you were in a situation where your personal opinion/belief would cost you a lot, would you still stand up for it? To what extent? What would you do in practice?