308 Joel White 3. The Difficulty in Identifying Anti-Imperial Subtexts in Paul In view of the absence of direct evidence, proponents of an anti- imperial Paul have turned their attention to examining the subtext of Paul’s writing. This is, of course, unobjectionable in principle, at least since modern literary analysis has made us aware of the powerful semiotic force of what might be lying “between the lines” of a text. But getting at subtexts can be a problem, especially when we are dealing with texts in different languages from different cultures, particularly ancient ones. Many scholars believe Paul’s anti-imperialist subversive subtext is most accessible via his conspicuous choice of vocabulary. Horsley, for example, argues that “[t]he starting point in recognizing that Paul was preaching an anti-imperial gospel is that much of his key language would have evoked echoes of the imperial cult and ideology”(8). Horsley and those sympathetic to his position argue that Paul consciously appropriated and thereby subverted certain catchwords that in their 1st century context were often associated with Roman conventions and institutions. These include some from the standard stock of quasi-technical terms frequently used by the early Church such as eujaggevlion (9), dikaiosuvnh (10), ejkklhsiva (11), and parousiva (12). No one argues this case more unabashedly than Dieter Georgi in his discussion of Paul’s Letter to the Romans: [E]very page of the letter contains indications that Paul has very concrete and critical objections to the dominant political theology of the Roman Empire… By using such loaded terms as euangelion, pistis, dikaiosynˇ, and eirenˇ as central concepts in Romans, he evokes their associations to Roman political theology” (13). (8) R.A. HORSLEY, “Paul’s Counter-Imperial Gospel: Introduction”, Paul and Empire. Religion and Power in Roman Imperial Society (ed. R.A. HORSLEY) (Harrisburg, PA 1997) 140. (9) Cf. N.T. WRIGHT, What Saint Paul Really Said. Was Paul of Tarsus the Real Founder of Christianity? (Grand Rapids, MI 1997) 43. (10) Cf. N. ELLIOT, “The Apostle Paul and Empire”, In the Shadow of Empire. Reclaiming the Bible as a History of Faithful Resistance (ed. R.A. HORSLEY) (Louisville, KY 2008) 98; N.T. WRIGHT, “Paul’s Gospel and Caesar’s Empire”, Paul and Politics. Ekklesia, Israel, Imperium, Interpretation: Essays in Honor of Krister Stendahl (ed. R.A. HORSLEY) (Harrisburg, PA 2000) 170-172. (11) Cf. HORSLEY, “Building an Alternative Society: Introduction”, Paul and Empire, 209. (12) Cf. J.R. HARRISON, “Paul and the Imperial Gospel at Thessaloniki”, JSNT 25 (2002) 82-83. (13) D. GEORGI, “God Turned Upside Down”, Paul and Empire, 148.