Peace / Security - Titles of Stabiity

Peace

Primary definition of peace: absence of war.

Josephus claims that David had time to write psalms, “being freed from wars and dangers, and enjoying for the future a profound peace” (Antiquities of the Jews 7.305). In Rome itself, the Temple of Peace was a tangible sign of peace and war: “The temple always stands open in time of war, but is closed when peace has come” (Plutarch Numa 20.1).

Augustus: “Within one year, [he] brought about a condition of absolute peace” (Appian Civil Wars 5.13). “[Augustus] disseminated peace everywhere over sea and land to the ends of the world” (Philo Gaius 309).

A look back at the reigns of Augustus & Tiberius: “Never have the Romans and their allies thrived in such peace and plenty” (Strabo Geography 6.4.2).

Caligula’s reign: “And what is better than peace? But peace springs from right government” (Philo Gaius 68).

Peace as a Greeting

Paul includes peace with grace in his opening greeting in every letter except Colossians. Grace was a simple adaptation of the standard Greek greeting, but peace appears to be a unique feature of the Pauline letters. Its inclusion is most likely due to Paul’s Old Testament background and the prevalence of the Hebrew word shalom as a Jewish greeting. In Paul’s epistolary introductions, peace functions more as a formulaic greeting than a specifically nuanced term.

Peace as a Benefit from Jesus

Col 3.15: “And let the peace of Christ rule in your hearts, to which indeed you were called in one body.”

While the peace of the Roman Empire was corporate and external, this peace is corporate (“in your hearts,” “in one body”) and internal (“in your hearts”).

Eph 2.13-18: “But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ. For he himself is our peace, who has made us both one and has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility by abolishing the law of commandments expressed in ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace, and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby killing the hostility. And he came and preached peace to you who were far off and peace to those who were near. For through him we both have access in one Spirit to the Father.”

The overarching theme of these verses is that Jesus’ sacrifice brings Jews and Gentiles together into one body of believers. The result of this peacemaking work is the church “being built together into a dwelling place for God by the Spirit” (22). To succeed in that unifying work, Jesus “abolish[ed] the law of commandments,” particularly circumcision (11-­‐‑12), which stood as a “dividing wall of hostility” between Jew and Gentile. Thus, the peace that Jesus provides is a multi-­ethnic unity accomplished by his sacrificial death. While Rome was certainly a multi-­ethnic empire, there exists no evidence for the sacrifice of the emperor in providing peace. On the contrary, the emperor’s longevity and skillful administration were key to maintaining Roman peace.

Summary When Paul uses peace in the body of one of his letters, he always refers to peace experienced corporately by Jesus’ people and connects that peace with observable, external harmony among believers. This usage accomplishes goals similar to those of imperial peace; it does not displace it.

Security

Julius: “But what kind of oath after this will be a guarantee of peace?” (Appian Civil Wars 2.19).

“Shall kinship to Caesar, or any other of the great at Rome, enable [a man] to live secure?” (Epictetus Discourses 1.9.7).

Pauline “Peace and Security”

1Th 5.3: “While people are saying, ‘There is peace and security,’ then sudden destruction will come upon them as labor pains come upon a pregnant woman, and they will not escape.”

The difficulty of precisely identifying a potentially imperial referent for “peace and security” is increased by the fact that this verse does not present these words as Paul’s own words, but as the words of others around the Thessalonian church. Furthermore, Paul quotes these words without any helpful context and treats them as a false statement. Those around the Thessalonian believers who claimed to have “peace and security” were wrong. They would, in fact, experience sudden destruction under God’s wrath. Thus Paul tells his readers that the expectation of “peace and security” that surrounded them is wrong without identifying the exact source of that expectation.

Though the evidence does not point conclusively to the existence of “peace and security” as a slogan to be rebutted, both concepts were important in imperial ideology and there is a possibility that Paul is borrowing the words or ideas of imperial supporters. If he is responding to imperial claims, however, his critique actually goes deeper than mere political subversion. Paul’s concern is not that the empire promised peace and security per se, but that people might view imperial peace and security as ultimate. The empire provided peace and security, as a good government should do (Rom. 13). However, that peace and security is not ultimate. Paul’s desire is that his readers not be swayed to rely on a temporary, limited substitute for Jesus’ ultimate peace and security. He is not subverting the emperor; he is reminding his readers that human government itself is limited and inferior compared to Jesus’ final government.

Application