The Invention of Religion (1)

But I confess this to you, that in accordance with the Way, which they call a sect, I do serve the God of our fathers, believing everything that is in accordance with the Law and is written in the Prophets;  Acts 24:14 NASB

Sect – If you’ve been following my comments on Daniel Boyarin’s book Border Lines, you have discovered that in the first century there was no hard distinction between orthodoxy and sectarian practice.  Now you know that the idea of heresy as a dividing tool was invented by Justin Martyr and copied by the Rabbis, driving a wedge not only between Jews and Christians but also separating groups of believers who had always lived and practiced together despite theological differences.  Hopefully these few studies have corrected our idea that Jews and Messianic followers (before they were called Christians) broke fellowship with each other over doctrine.  The history says otherwise.  It appears that the larger faith community was quite capable of including many differing interpretations of God’s interaction with men including the text of the corpus of sacred materials (which was not canonized).  This revision of our historical awareness is essential for understanding Paul’s remark before Felix.

Let’s start by asking who the “they” is when Paul says, “which they call a sect.”  The verb tells us a bit.  It’s légō (to speak) in the third person, plural, present active indicative.  In other words, Paul is reporting a present common fact.  Other unnamed parties consider Paul’s way of approaching the God of Israel as a sect.  Some of these we know about from previous letters (Galatians, for example).  Some men who were associated with a different group in Jerusalem took exception to Paul’s inclusive view regarding the Gentiles.  But only some; many others in Jerusalem found Paul’s point of view entirely acceptable (cf. Acts 15).  The conflict was not between “orthodox” Jews and Pauline Messianic believers because there was no orthodoxy.  There were only multiple believing communities, and Paul was associated with one of those.

When Paul uses the Greek term translated “sect,” we are misled by the English.  The word, of course, is haíresis which you know means only “differing opinion” in the first century.  We should add that in Paul’s world, haíresis was another word for “choice.”  Boyarin’s analysis makes it clear that “choice” was the operating mode of religious affiliation in the first century.  In fact, we should clear up an unintentional spill-over when we describe it this way.  You see, in the first century there is no “religion” either.  There are multiple ways of worshipping YHVH, and multiple interpretations of the sacred texts but there was no authorized official body that sanctioned or rejected any of these practices.  Paul’s choice was just one of many.  Of course, he argues that his is the right and just choice, but it was still a choice.  Our word “sect” doesn’t imply this.  A sect is a group that is defined by its separation and difference from orthodoxy.  A sect is a faction, and to be such, an official body is required.  A sect cannot exist where these is no larger official group.  What this means is that Paul does not claim that “The Way” is a sect.  He merely states that “The Way” is one choice among many, a choice that implies certain beliefs about the Messiah, the resurrection, and the sacred texts.  But that choice is within the culture of the Jews.  I do not say, “within Judaism” because Judaism as an official religion did not yet exist.  It took a hundred years and the affront of Justin to force Jews to invent a “religion.”  Keep this in mind when you read Schlier’s explanation of haíresis in the TDNT:

“The corresponding rabbinic term was first used for parties in Judaism but later only for those opposed by the rabbis (late 1st and early 2nd cent.) and then for non-Jewish groups (late 2nd cent.).”^[1]  Clearly his analysis of the term is located within Rabbinic Judaism, a development that didn’t occur for another 100 years.

At least we’ve learned this much: a religion is an invention of men who wish to draw boundaries around acceptable and unacceptable practices and thoughts about God.  They sometimes do this with the best intentions in mind, e.g., protecting the “flock” from divergent (false) ideas.  But this not a development of spirituality though it often poses as such.  In the ancient Middle East, before men sought to control who was in and who was out, spiritual connections with the God of Israel were considerably more flexible.  What mattered was how you lived, and how you lived had a much wider umbrella than what you thought about any particular theological concept.  Now you can ask yourself, “Am I religious?”

Topical Index: haíresis, religion, sect, Acts 24:14

^[1] Kittel, G., Friedrich, G., & Bromiley, G. W. (1985). Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, Abridged in One Volume (p. 28). Grand Rapids, MI: W.B. Eerdmans.