Paul and empire

Wise words from NT Wright, in his contribution to Horsley’s Paul and Politics: Ekklesia, Israel, Imperium, Interpretation : “It is . . . much easier to highlight Paul’s confrontation with some aspect of his world when the aspect in question is one that is currently so deeply out of fashion. To say that Paul opposed imperialism is about as politically dangerous as suggesting that he was in favor of sunlight, fresh air, and orange juice. What we are faced with throughout his writings, however, is the fact that he was opposed to paganism in all its shapes and forms; not, however . . . with a dualistic opposition that could recognize nothing good in non-Jewish or non-Christian humans and their ways of life but with the settled and unshakeable conviction that the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, who was now revealed in and as Jesus of Nazareth, stood over against all other gods and goddesses, claiming unique allegiance.”

The money quote: “Paul . . . was not opposed to Caesar’s empire primarily because it was an empire, with all the unpleasant things we have learned to associate with that word, but because it was Caesar’s, and because Caesar was claiming divine status and honors which belonged only to the one God.”

To confirm the point by way of contrast: Do we find the same enthusiasm among scholars for Paul’s opposition to sodomy?