The practice of apotheosis, or to deify and have someone ascend to the heavenss, was developed from Ancient Mesopotamia. The most notable of which is the apotheosis of Hadrian’s wife Sabina. White is saying that the early Christian’s apotheosis-like retelling of Jesus has its origins from the Greek practice and even gives context to the concept “gospel”. When Octavian defeated Antony and Cleopatra he was given the title Augustus which literally means “hallowed” or “revered”. And to add to that White says a temple was erected in honor of his conquest and the he brought “good tidings” along with his reign. This concept of “euangelion” or “gospel” was used by early Christians to announce Jesus’ reign, and in tandem with apotheosis language regarding his ascent to the heavens, it solidified his image as the divine being that has come to save the Jews and gentiles from the world.

The story of Romulus by Livy’s account, or his death rather, was a typical apothecial narration. A sudden storm that claimed the life of a king and reappearance after his departure to his “fellow citizen” to proclaim that Rome be the capital of the world. The primary purpose of this story is to reinforce the power and authority of Rome. The varying views of later emperors such as Claudius had mixed results regarding how they were taken. While some stood by the deification of Roman the emperors, even if Claudius rule was ridiculed due to his modern day equivalence of cerebral palsy, others like Seneca just mocked the entire practice by telling the satirical story of Claudius’ encounter with the God’s in heavens and how he was eventually banished from the heavens. These varying acceptance of the divinization is telling of the nature of Roman’s empire. And that in some places these stories were more likely to have been accepted than in more Roman areas.

These stories seemed to have more influence in Greek areas because of the backdrop and history of the people. Their mythological beliefs lends itself to accepting these stories more openly than other places. Temples were built in the names of the deified emperors and it served the syncretized religions effectively. The pragmatic purpose it serves is simple – happy citizen’s means easier access and control of their land.

The picture painted for the first century reader of Luke Chapter 2:1-14, 25-35 is much clearer for them than modern eyes skimming this passage. First is the kingship relation and tie to the Kind David. It marks a royal lineage that is imperative for an emperor to be exalted or lifted to divine status. Second is the angel appearing to the people saying do not be afraid, because the entrance of a divine being is always marked with angels announcing to people “do not be afraid”. Third is the “good news” or “euangelion”, a rather political statement that an era of good tidings is incoming and again is tied to an arrival of a ruler or an emperor. And last starting at verse 25, is someone claiming Jesus as someone who will be destined for the “falling and the rising of many” and it speaks of someone who will conquer and save people. It seems to be a checklist: savior, extraordinary birth, divinity, messiah, son of God, royal lineage and so on, and all are checked off. Luke is clear in his persuasion, Jesus is all that and he starts off convincing the reader of that with his story.

a. According to the Romans, when an emperor dies, the process of apotheosis (to deify, or god away) occurs in which they become gods in the other realm. White brings this to attention when comparing the story of Jesus’s ascension into heaven to ancient Roman belief. He discusses several depictions of Roman characters such as Hadrian and Antoninus Pius ascending on some sort of angel figure into the heavens with the gods. 

b. In almost all of the history of the ancient Mediterranean world, kings, emperors, or who ever was in power was conceived to hold divine power. Though in different cultures, these beliefs varied slightly, they played a huge role in the depiction of the divine in ancient Rome. The notion of a unique birth became widely important in declaring divinity as shown in stories of Alexander. Especially after Alexander’s death, the development of the Roman imperial cult began and soon joined tradition.

c. On page 73, White says, “The worship of the emperor as divine did not sit quite so well with the old Roman aristocracy as it might have with Greek provincials.” In Rome, divinity was often challenged and believed with caution, especially after the claims of Antony and Cleopatra. In the history of the Greek world, Augustus is hailed as a god whose divinity is never brought into question. If you were emperor,  which one would you promote? It seems clear. With such conflicting views in religious practices in these two large empires, an empire in between would likely experience a lot of disagreement and conflict in belief.

d. If I were a first-century reader looking at this writing from Luke, I would start my checklist of how Jesus meets the definition of the divine. Luke accentuates the story of Jesus’s birth. As is being from a virgin birth isn’t unique enough, Luke details the poor conditions in which this proclaimed god was born. Would a god not be assumed/imagined to brought into the world in riches and health? Next, they were greeted by angels who spoke to the shepherds proclaiming Jesus to be the Messiah. With all of these factors, it is made clear that Luke is depicting a god. This story is a perfect fit to what the cult of the emperor would describe as divinity.

Stories of Jesus’ ascension, more specifically, that which is described in Acts was not as entirely unique and astounding to hear as we think it must have been today. In fact, the Romans had a belief of their own, apotheosis, the process in which a Roman emperor would become a god and ascend to the heavens after passing away. White uses a relief (shown on page 70) depicting Empress Sabina, wife of Hadrian, being carried away from the site of her cremation by an angel to further prove this point. More so, the similarities did not end or begin here as it got to the point where philosophers Justin Martyr and Celsus debated on whether or not Christian stories were one of a kind. Celsus questioned how Martyr could site Roman and Greek mythology to defend and assert Jesus’ importance and credibility yet continue to argue that Christian stories were completely different.

As far as worship, divine status being given to kings and emperors occurred in many places in different ways but the emperor cult religious system was prominent. In Israel, the king would be “adopted annually to be God’s son as a symbol of the special relationship between God and nation” (White 71). Here, the king although not divine, was chosen and overseen by the gods (White 71). In Egypt, the pharaoh was a god in every sense of the word, being symbolized as Horus, the son of Osiris and Isis. The emperor cult system came into Hellenistic culture after the death of Alexander when he was then heroized and stories like that of his birth were told to solidify the idea that he was divine. Furthermore, White states that miraculous birth stories “link the divine-man tradition to the rise of the Roman imperial cult” (72). As one would expect, naming emperors as gods became much more popular after Alexander (White 72).

Although the emperor cult system was popular, there were some skeptics, for example, Livy, who wrote about Romulus’ deification. Based on the language he chose to use we can see that he did not fully believe some of the stories he was mentioning because he was using phrases like “I believe,” “it is said,” “as the story goes,” and “it is amazing…” (131). White also mentions that “the worship of the emperor as divine did not sit quite well with the old Roman aristocracy as it might have with the Greek provincials” (73) and goes on to say that Augustus was cautious about titles such as “divi filius,” son of god (74), which hints to some reluctance to keep the practice going.

However, something must have changed along the way because he later chose to expand emperor worship into Greek territory which may have been an attempt at creating some cohesion between the large empire that stretched from Spain to Syria. Building sanctuaries in far places within the empire would then make the knowledge more accessible and that society more willing to follow. This is what I would think Luke is trying to do if I were reading Lk 2:1-14 and 25-35 in the first century, make the idea accessible by molding it to fit into what I know, the emperor cult religious system, just as we have learned all the authors have done while accentuating details that would define Jesus as divine. For example, just like Alexander (a famous figure at the time), Jesus has a miraculous birth story, one of the characteristics that identifies a divine figure.