What do you think?
Rate this book
The Arrogance of Nations, paperback edition: Reading Romans in the Shadow of Empire
Elliott offers a fresh and surprising reinterpretation of Paul's letter to the Romans in the context of Roman imperial ideology, bringing to the text the latest insights from classical studies, rhetorical criticism, postcolonial criticism, and people's history. By setting the letter alongside Roman texts (Cicero, Virgil, the Res Gestae of Augustus, Seneca, poets from the age of Nero, as well as later historians and satirists), Elliott provides a dramatic new reading of the letter as Paul's confrontation with the arrogance of empireand an emerging Christianity already tempted by the seductive ideology of imperial power.
240 pages, Paperback
First published April 1, 2008
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
June 3, 2017
Neil Elliott’s political analysis of Paul’s Letter to the Romans is most valuable. It is easy to forget the reality of Empire at the time of the letter’s writing, but we indulge in such forgetfulness at our exegetical peril. After all, this letter was sent to the imperial city of the time. Elliott gives much important historical and social background to the letter. Most importantly, he focuses on the expulsion of the Jews by Claudius and Nero’s reinstatement of them only a few years before Paul likely wrote the letter. With this background, Elliott suggests that the letter was written to a mixed congregation of Judeans (as he prefers to use in references to the Jews) and non-Judaeans. Since the returning Judeans would have been impoverished by the earlier banishment, the non-Judaeans seemed to have the upper hand in economic and political power and in numbers. Elliott draws out many implications of this social setting. One of the mor illuminating is the distinction between “strong” and “weak” members of the congregation. The “weak” members are (at least mostly) Judeans who, as noted are socially weak. Moreover, being worshipers who continue to follow Torah, they have great difficulty in finding food, especially any meant, that they can count on being kosher. That is why they mostly eat vegetables.
Elliott structures most of the book on the imperial values of imperium, clementia, justitia, and pietas and virtus itself. In each case, Elliott contrasts the Roman “virtue” with Paul’s proclamation of the counter-claim in Christ. Christ, for example, has ushered in the new imperium and Christ is thus the true “emperor.” The discussion of clementia is especially interesting. He argues that Roman clemency, as with any imperial clemency, is a political move intended to demonstrate the emperor’s power. Nero had just given the Jews “clemency, but had left them hopelessly impoverished and had made sure to stifle any notion that the Jews as a group would be considered eligible for citizenship. This hopeless attempt is what Elliott thinks Paul was getting as when he scolds the Jews for trying to establish their “own righteousness.” (Rom. 10: 3) So it is that it is Christ who has established true clemency. This political background leads Elliott to giving us what is the most coherent explication of the tortuous arguments about the role of the Judeans in Rom. 9-11 that I have ever seen.
Elliott’s social background leads him to reject the theory, championed by Douglas Campbell, that Paul was primarily refuting a Jewish teacher who was trying the Judaize a Gentile congregation. Elliot’s counter-proposal shows how difficult it is to interpret diatribe two thousand years in the past. In any case, it is worth mentioning that Elliott supports other lynchpins of Campbell’s arguments on Justification, interpreting faith as “faithfulness” and emphasizing the lifestyle claims of the gift of faith.
The weakness of the book is that it does very little with chapters 3-6, which arguably the meatiest portion of the letter. I personally see major political implications to the baptismal imagery in these chapters which, at the time of writing, could have referred to dying to the Roman Empire so as to live anew in Christ. With that said, it is important to stress that Elliott’s political analysis does not otherwise shortchange a theological understanding of Romans. What Elliott helps us see with new eyes is how political Paul’s theology is and how theological is Paul’s political vision.
In concluding, I point out that Elliott includes several contemporary examples of imperial power wrecking its wrath on many people. These examples should make readers who are citizens of a particular country uncomfortable
Elliott structures most of the book on the imperial values of imperium, clementia, justitia, and pietas and virtus itself. In each case, Elliott contrasts the Roman “virtue” with Paul’s proclamation of the counter-claim in Christ. Christ, for example, has ushered in the new imperium and Christ is thus the true “emperor.” The discussion of clementia is especially interesting. He argues that Roman clemency, as with any imperial clemency, is a political move intended to demonstrate the emperor’s power. Nero had just given the Jews “clemency, but had left them hopelessly impoverished and had made sure to stifle any notion that the Jews as a group would be considered eligible for citizenship. This hopeless attempt is what Elliott thinks Paul was getting as when he scolds the Jews for trying to establish their “own righteousness.” (Rom. 10: 3) So it is that it is Christ who has established true clemency. This political background leads Elliott to giving us what is the most coherent explication of the tortuous arguments about the role of the Judeans in Rom. 9-11 that I have ever seen.
Elliott’s social background leads him to reject the theory, championed by Douglas Campbell, that Paul was primarily refuting a Jewish teacher who was trying the Judaize a Gentile congregation. Elliot’s counter-proposal shows how difficult it is to interpret diatribe two thousand years in the past. In any case, it is worth mentioning that Elliott supports other lynchpins of Campbell’s arguments on Justification, interpreting faith as “faithfulness” and emphasizing the lifestyle claims of the gift of faith.
The weakness of the book is that it does very little with chapters 3-6, which arguably the meatiest portion of the letter. I personally see major political implications to the baptismal imagery in these chapters which, at the time of writing, could have referred to dying to the Roman Empire so as to live anew in Christ. With that said, it is important to stress that Elliott’s political analysis does not otherwise shortchange a theological understanding of Romans. What Elliott helps us see with new eyes is how political Paul’s theology is and how theological is Paul’s political vision.
In concluding, I point out that Elliott includes several contemporary examples of imperial power wrecking its wrath on many people. These examples should make readers who are citizens of a particular country uncomfortable
Displaying 1 of 1 review