NT Background Check 2
Now that we’ve had an overview of significant historical events that are presupposed by the NT, let’s take a more ground view of the NT. First, let’s look briefly at the political landscape.
Palestine (that is to say, the people of Israel, at the time of Jesus and at the time of the writing of the NT books/letters) was part of the Roman Empire, and hence, ruled by Rome. At the birth of Jesus the Emperor was Caesar Augustus (27 BC—14 AD); during Jesus’ ministry and Paul’s conversion the Emperor was Tiberius (14—37 AD); during Paul’s missionary journeys & writings we’d be looking at Claudius and Nero (40s—mid 60s); and for the rest of the NT, Vespasian, Titus, Domitian, and Trajan (late 60s—early 2nd century).
The Roman Empire was an extremely hierarchical society. Rome valued power, wealth and status, and cared very little for the poor. The Roman elite—1% of the population—harshly ruled/controlled the masses; they gained their power through excessive taxation and through military might. Although the elite constituted a tiny minority, they were by far the largest consumers in the Empire. Consequently, the masses worked, largely, to support the lavish lifestyles of the rich.
Roman rule was characterized by Roman Imperial Theology. The basic tenets of Roman Imperial theology were thus: the gods have appointed Rome to rule the world; the gods’ presence is manifest with the Emperor; the gods’ direct history through the agency of the Emperor and Rome; and the Emperor and the Empire are the gods’ agents for securing societal blessing. You can see how Christianity—Christian teaching about Jesus (especially but not exclusively in Matthew’s Gospel)—would have challenged each of these planks: the Emperor vs. Jesus, Rome vs. the Kingdom of God, etc.
Now, let’s take a quick glance at the social landscape. In terms of economics, a few things can be said. Palestine’s economy was an agriculturally based, i.e., farm production. The majority of Jews/inhabitants were rural; only a minority was urban. While the majority of the population, i.e., the ruralites, worked the land, the land was owned by the elites, i.e., the urbanites. Cities were oriented towards consumption and not production; hence, the poor ruralites worked the land, largely, to line the pockets of the rich urbanites.
In terms of social class, a person’s social standing in the Empire was determined by power, privilege, and prestige. Power was achieved through a person’s office or land: so for example, a government higher-up (like a senator—not the NHL team), had lots of power; or someone who owned a lot of land had power b/c they derived wealth from their land. That leads to privilege, which was achieved through a person’s wealth: the richer you were, the more privilege you had, the higher your social standing. This in turn leads to prestige, which was achieved through one’s position on the social ladder: the higher you were on the ladder, the more prestige you had—the more power you exercised.
Social class in the Roman Empire, then, could be described in terms of a triangle/pyramid, whereby the tiny apex represents the elites (the Roman aristocracy), followed by the Civic leaders, military leaders, and religious leaders; followed by a tiny middle class (small business owners; free farmers). The bulk of the triangle/pyramid, however, would consist of the poor (slave farmers, tradesmen, peasants) and the extremely poor (beggars, widows, orphans, crippled).
Next time we’ll take a gander at the religious landscape of first-century Palestine.