New Testament Studies

http://journals.cambridge.org/NTS

Additional services for New Testament Studies:

Email alerts: Click here

Subscriptions: Click here
Commercial reprints: Click here
Terms of use : Click here

Coals of Fire: Sign of Repentance or Revenge?

William Klassen

New Testament Studies / Volume 9 / Issue 04 / July 1963, pp 337 - 350

DOI: 10.1017/S0028688500002174, Published online: 05 February 2009

Link to this article: http://journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S0028688500002174

How to cite this article:

William Klassen (1963). Coals of Fire: Sign of Repentance or Revenge?. New
Testament Studies, 9, pp 337-350 doi:10.1017/S0028688500002174

Request Permissions : Click here

Downloaded from http://journals.cambridge.org/NTS, IP address: 138.251.14.35 on 04 Apr 2015

New Test. Stud. 9, pp. 337-50-

WILLIAM KLASSEN

GOALS OF FIRE:
SIGN OF REPENTANCE OR
REVENGE?
Anyone who has studied Rom. xii. 20 is aware that it is a notorious crux
interpretum. The strategy of dealing with one's enemy is clear: &AA& £ccv
Treiv^ 6 ^X^P^SCTOU>Tc«3tJllSe ovrov • £ocv Sivy 9, TT6TI3E OCUT6V. Difficult as it is
for the Christian to adapt his life to this admonition anticipations of such a
noble approach are not lacking in ancient literature. The wise man ac-
cording to early Egyptian religion conquers by mastering his emotions. The
prudent way is to avoid a conflict, for the situation may imply complications
which one cannot foresee. It is the silent man who conquers and who is
pre-eminently the successful man according to Egyptian religion.1 In the
strict sense this is not a parallel to Paul's words in Romans, but it is clear
evidence that religion early moved beyond the talion principle in discussing
the question of dealing with one's enemy.
Epictetus also provides an example for a sentiment that comes close to that
of the apostle when he says: ' To fancy that we shall be contemptible in the
sight of other men, if we do not employ every means to hurt the first enemies
we meet, is characteristic of extremely ignoble and thoughtless men. For it
is a common saying among us that the contemptible man is recognized among
other things by his incapacity to do harm; but he is much better recognized
by his incapacity to extend help.' 2
Other instances of this attitude towards enemies have been collected from
philosophical and religious writers.3 There can be no question that in his
position Paul is voicing what others had already voiced before him. In fact
his quotation is taken from the book of Proverbs showing that he bases his
position on the writings of the Hebrew people. The real crux from the stand-
point of the interpreter comes in the following words: TOOTO yctp TTOICOV
av6pctKccs TTupis acopeuaeis £irl TI'IV Ke<paAf]v OCUTOO. Here Paul provides a
motive for love towards enemies and thus the understanding of these words
is crucially important. They have not only theological but also practical rele-
vance for all who are concerned about how a Christian should deal with his
enemies.

1
Henri Frankfort, Ancient Egyptian Religion (New York: Harper Torchbook, 1961), pp. 66-8.
a
Fragments 7, cited from Loeb Classical Library edition.
3
E.g. M. Waldmann, Die Feindesliebe in der antiken Welt und im Christentum (1902), and H. Haas,
Idee und Ideal der Feindesliebe in der ausserchristlichen Welt (1927).
23-z

http://journals.cambridge.org Downloaded: 04 Apr 2015 IP address: 138.251.14.35

338 WILLIAM KLASSEN
In this difficult passage commentators have at times been satisfied with
'commonly held explanations', but when these are examined they leave
much to be desired.1 An examination of the image 'coals of fire' is necessary
if we are to arrive at the correct understanding of this difficult verse.

THE DERIVATION OF THE IMAGE

The striking vividness of this imagery has led some scholars to begin with the
assumption that the fire is not meant to be taken literally but metaphorically.
Thus Skrinjar notes that the Hebrew word for fire is used sometimes for
Divine punishment, usually vindictive punishment, and even once for
medicinal punishment (Exod. xxiv. 17).2 Since fire in the Bible often
signifies Divine anger, Skrinjar takes the figure to signify the emotion that
wells up in the man whom God medicinally punishes in this way with the
coals signifying the intolerable suffering of self-hatred which results when
hate is requited with love. Likewise Bernhard Weiss says ' Glowing coals is an
image portraying penetrating and enduring pain'. 3
There are a number of interpreters who see the image of fire here as
derived from the smelting furnace. Adam Clarke may be allowed to speak
for them. During the smelting process the ore is put into the furnace and
fire is put both under and over that the metal may be liquefied, and leaving
the scoria and the dross, may fall down pure to the bottom of the furnace.
According to Clarke this is beautifully expressed by an English poet in his
explanation of the passage:
So artists melt the sullen ore of lead,
By heaping coals offireupon its head.
In the kind warmth the metal learns to glow,
And pure from dross the silver runs below.
From this Clarke deduces that 'coals of fire are intended to produce not an
evil but the most beneficial effect'.4 Basically the same approach is taken by
J. E. Yonge when he says that it is generally agreed that the metaphor is
taken from metallurgy even though it becomes necessary to see this metaphor
not in its literal meaning, 'not in the process described, but in the effect
1
Thus Vincent Taylor, The Epistle to the Romans (London, 1955) says: 'This phrase is commonly
explained as meaning " the burning pangs of shame "' (p. 84). Sanday and Headlam also conclude:
'Coals offire,must, therefore, mean, as most commentators since Augustine have said, "the burning
pangs of shame", which may produce remorse and penitence and contrition' (A Critical and Exegetical
Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans (New York, 1926), p. 365). Perhaps the most uncommon
interpretation is that of Joseph Rickaby, who feels that this verse ' merely means that you will bring
your enemy to reason more effectively by kindness than by heaping coals of fire upon his head'
{Notes on St Paul: Corinthians, Galatians, Romans (London, 1926), p. 426).
a
See Albinus Skrinjar, 'Carbones ignis congeres super caput eius', Verbum Domini, xvm (1938),
143-5°-
3
Bernhard Weiss, Der Brief an die Rb'mer (Gottingen, 1899), p. 527.
4
Adam Clarke, The Mew Testament (New York, 1857), 11, 142. Albert Sundberg called my
attention to this passage.

http://journals.cambridge.org Downloaded: 04 Apr 2015 IP address: 138.251.14.35

 C O A L S O F F I R E : SIGN O F R E P E N T A N C E O R R E V E N G E ? 339
1
produced'. According to John Steele the metaphor refers to the work of a
blacksmith and the expression is used in that trade to refer to the heating of
a broken vessel, thus mending it again. In arriving at this interpretation
Steele draws from an experience he had in China as a missionary. It is
doubtful, however, that Chinese blacksmiths can provide the clue to its
meaning.2
Indeed part of the uneasiness of interpreters stems from the concern that
the metaphor must be evaluated in its totality—that is, in some way 'the
coals of fire' must be brought together with their location, 'on the head'—
otherwise we will not get at the meaning of the metaphor. Sensing this
problem, A. T. Fryer referred to his experience in Palestine where he observed
that the wealthy often shared their embers for culinary purposes with the
poor; they did so by letting the servants carry these burning embers on trays
on their heads.3 According to this Paul would be advocating a beneficent
sharing with our enemy. Now certainly such sharing is already in the text
but Fryer's explanation does not solve the relationship between the act of
kindness and the coals of fire.
Other interpreters have been guided primarily by contextual considera-
tions independent of the clause introduced by ydp in v. 20. Thus Walter
Liithi equates the coals of fire with the fire of God's love and says: 'Heaping
coals of fire upon the head of an enemy is not a sign of weakness of character
on the part of the Christian, but the one act of aggression that love permits
and commands.'4 What has taken place in this interpretation is a spirituali-
zation of the text: a severance between the literal text and the spiritual
meaning derived from the context. Whether the meaning is correct or not is
not now the question. Certainly we will always be somewhat uneasy about an
interpretation which cannot be supported by the literal meaning of words.
If the ' coals of fire' are not literal to what then do they refer? The answers
have been diverse. Augustine took the position that the coals refer to coals of
shame and repentance, a shame evoked by the goodness done to the enemy
and this shame will be the beginning of repentance. Luther quotes Augustine
with approval: 'Blessed Augustine writes: "We must understand this saying
in the following way: we should induce a man who has done us harm to
repent of what he did, and, in this way, we shall do him good. For such
'coals', i.e. benefits, have the power to burn his spirit, i.e., to distress him."

1
'Heaping Coals of Fire on the Head', The Expositor, 3rd ser. n (1885), 158-9.
a
Expository Times, XLIV (1932), 141.
3
Expository Times, xxxvi (1924-5), 478.
4
The Letter to the Romans (Edinburgh, 1961), ad loc, Sanday and Headlam {ibid.) offer an inter-
esting example of how easily modern interpreters move from literal meanings to derived meanings
either on the basis of the context or on the principle that a writer cannot contradict himself. While
they say that dv6pocKcts trup6s 'clearly means "terrible pangs or pains"', they spiritualize this forthwith.
The Moffatt translation also takes this approach when it reads: ' in this way you will make him feel
a burning sense of shame. ' C. H. Dodd {The Epistle to the Romans (London, 1947), pp. 200 f.) is not
sure that it represents the original meaning of Prov. xxv. 22, but it renders Paul's meaning accurately.

http://journals.cambridge.org Downloaded: 04 Apr 2015 IP address: 138.251.14.35

340 WILLIAM KLASSEN
This is what is meant by the words of the Psalter: "The sharp arrows of the
mighty with the coals that lay waste" (Psalm cxx. 4).. . .So then, it is the
benefactions one has performed for his adversaries that are the "coals of
fire".'1 But Ruffenach has observed that to connect coals offireto shame in
a metaphor is utterly foreign to Scripture and to profane literature as well.2
Ruffenach prefers to accept an interpretation-of this passage which he
attributes to Jerome who saw the good deeds as softening the hard heart of
the enemy and kindling love within him. According to his opinion this
interpretation is not far-fetched but rather an allusion to a practice of daily
life which he observed among the Arabs. When the fire in the tent is dead and
cold, they arrange the fuel in a neat pile, and crown it with hot coals on top,
the hot coals being called keph or head.3
There are finally those who see in the coals of fire a threat of severe punish-
ment. It is apparent that from the time of the Sodom and Gomorrah narra-
tive (Gen. xix. 24) onwards ' coals of fire' could be taken in this way and there
are certain Psalms which clearly used it in this way (Psalm xi. 6; cxx. 4;
perhaps also in Psalm cxl. 10, where there is a textual problem).4 Perhaps
Chrysostom is the most famous interpreter who saw in this metaphor a
warning that the punishment would be severe precisely because the enemy
refused to respond to the deeds of love showered upon him.5 Though the
context is meaningless if this interpretation is adopted it does have the ad-
vantage of not spiritualizing any of the elements of the figure of speech. It
does not reduce the figure of speech to a simile8 or spiritualize any parts of
the image here used.7 But if one takes the literal elements of the image

1
Luther: Lectures on Romans, translated and edited by Wilhelm Pauck, The Library of Christian
Classics (Phila. 1961), xv, 355 f. (Unfortunately there is no indication where the Augustine quote
ends and Luther returns.) According to Sanday and Headlam this interpretation goes back to
Origen: ' . . . et ex hoc ignis in eo quidem succendatur, qui eum pro commissi conscientia torqueat
et adurat: et isti erunt carbones ignis, qui super caput eius ex nostro misericordiae et pietatis opere
congregantur' (ibid.).
2
F. Ruffenach, 'Prunas congregabis super caput eius', Verbum Domini, vi (1926), 210-13. Father
Robert Kelly, S.J., kindly assisted me with an English abstract of this essay and the one by Skrinjar.
8
Ruffenach, op. at. p. 213. There is some disagreement among modern writers on the precise
differences among the Church Fathers on this verse.
• H. J. Kraus, Biblischer Kommentar, Altes Testament (Neukirchen, Kreis Moers, i960), xv (Psalmen
II), ad loc, questions the reading 'burning coals'.
5
F. Godet, Commentary on St Paul's Epistle to the Romans (New York, 1883), p. 439, attributes this
position also to Grotius and Hengstenberg. According to Godet these writers see here an encourage-
ment to heap benefits on the head of the evildoer in order to aggravate the punishment with which
God will visit him. Dahood (see below) attributes this view also to Origen. This view finds some
support in II Esdras xvi. 53: ' Let no sinner say that he has not sinned; for God will burn coals of fire
on the head of him who says, " I have not sinned before God... ".'
6
So Charles Gore when he says: 'heap burning shame upon his enemy, like coals offire'(my
italics), St Paul's Epistle to the Romans (London, 1900), n, 106.
7
As several of the above-mentioned interpretations do. One could add: C. K. Barrett, A Com-
mentary on the Epistle to the Romans (London, 1957), where the burning coals 'are the fire of remorse'
or Stifler who speaks of 'coals of red-hot love' (James M. Stifler, The Epistle to the Romans (New
York, 1897), p. 227), while rejecting the 'burning shame' explanation as 'overdrawn'. James
Denney asserts that the 'burning shame' interpretation is 'hardly open to doubt' (Expositor's Greek
New Testament, 11, 694).

http://journals.cambridge.org Downloaded: 04 Apr 2015 IP address: 138.251.14.35

 GOALS OF FIRE: SIGN OF REPENTANCE OR REVENGE? 341
seriously then we must inquire more diligently about its meaning. Such an
inquiry must obviously begin with the Old Testament verse Paul is here
quoting.
PROVERBS XXV. 22
Old Testament scholars have been baffled about the meaning of the proverb
which Paul quotes, but the procedure outlined is in accord with other
statements on how to treat an enemy in the book of Proverbs. In recent
times it has been observed that such advice can be found also in Egyptian
literature. Since there is considerable evidence that Egyptian wisdom litera-
ture influenced Proverbs1 it becomes tempting to see in this verse evidence of
borrowing from Egypt; a temptation to which every serious scholar must
yield in this instance. The reason why the identification with Egypt becomes
necessary is that in the verse immediately following we read: 'The north
wind brings forth rain' (Prov. xxv. 23). This verse caused the rabbis diffi-
culties and they emended it because they realized that this was not true in
Palestine.2 Modern scholars like G. Kuhn have made conjectural emenda-
tions on the basis of which he reads: 'The north wind makes a fool out of the
rain' (by dispersing it). 3 A better solution is to see the origin of this proverb
in Egypt, where it is true that the north wind does bring rain.4
Other scholars have noted the difficulty in Prov. xxv. 22 and have suggested
solving it by emendation of that passage. According to the Old Testament
philologist M. J . Dahood,6 Gustave Bickell in 1891 was the first modern
Hebrew scholar to recognize that the Hebrew text of Prov. xxv. 22 taken at
its face value could not be squared either with the immediate context or with
the precepts of charity inculcated in such passages as Prov. xx. 22; xxiv. 17-
18; Sir. xxviii. 1-7. Consequently, Bickell emended the text by deleting the
vexatious phrase 'upon his head' and argued that the coals of fire were the
substance of the hatred ('der Brennstoffdes Hasses') which must be removed
by love for our enemies. By an act of charity a man will put away the burning
coals of hatred. Bickell maintained that this interpretation resulted in a
much nobler sentiment than that which emerged from traditional exegesis.
He tried to justify the deletion of 'upon his head' on the ground that this
prepositional phrase was inserted into the text after the true meaning had
been distorted.6
1
See the article, 'Agypten und die Bibel', RGG3, 1, cols. 117-21, by S. Morenz.
a
Note also the difficulty A. Cohen has with it in Proverbs (Soncino Press, London, 1945), ad loc.
3
G. Kuhn, Beitrage zur Erklarung des salmonisehen Spruchbuches (1931), p . 65, cited in Morenz (see
next note).
4
As observed by Siegfried Morenz, 'Feurige Kohlen auf dem Haupt', Theologische Literaturzeitung,
Lxxvin (1953), cols. 187-92. I owe the impetus for this study to this article to which all subsequent
Morenz references refer.
6
M. J. Dahood, 'Two Pauline Quotations from the Old Testament', Catholic Biblical Quarterly,
xvn
('955). '9-24-
8
Bickell's position is described here on the basis of Dahood's presentation of it who gives as its
source 'Kritische Bearbeitung der Proverbien', W-Z-K-M. v (1891), 283-4.

http://journals.cambridge.org Downloaded: 04 Apr 2015 IP address: 138.251.14.35

342 WILLIAM KLASSEN
Apparently independent of Bickell, T. K. Cheyne adopted a similar
position. His translation reads:
If thine enemy hunger, give him food;
Or if he thirst, give him water to drink;
For hot coals thou earnest away,
And Jehovah will recompense thee.
Cheyne states that the correction has been undertaken to relieve the writer
of the Proverb of the charge of ethical inconsistency. The hot coals of strife
will have been firmly grasped and removed and thus the quarrel will end.
It is true that Prov. xxvi. 20 f., to which T. K. Cheyne refers, seems to
support this understanding of the verse. There we read:
For lack of wood the fire goes out;
And where there is no whisperer, quarrelling ceases.
As charcoal to hot embers and wood to fire,
So is a quarrelsome man for kindling strife.
The main purpose of Dahood's study is to show that both Bickell and
Cheyne were essentially correct in their final result 'but that it is possible to
arrive at a translation similar to the one desired by them without a single
alteration of the M.T., thanks to our expanded knowledge of Hebrew
grammar'. 1
Dahood states that recent studies indicate that the preposition bv in
addition to its usual meanings could also denote 'from'. One could then
translate:' Thus, you will remove coals of fire from his head.' Dahood accepts
the position that 'coals of fire' is a metaphor for 'pains, afflictions' and the
author is then saying that by feeding your hungry enemy and giving him to
drink you will remove a serious affliction from his head. From the assertion
that 'blessings are upon the head of the just' (Prov. x. 6) it is possible to infer
that afflictions are upon the head of the unjust. In Arabic literature 'coals of
the heart' are the inquietudes which devour the soul, and to 'leave coals of
tamarisk in the heart of someone' is to cause him a worry which will perdure
as long as the burning charcoals from this plant.
Furthermore, Dahood seeks to establish the meaning of the participle
nnn which has no certain etymology, but which can be translated 'remove'. 2
This is the translation he prefers which would then give us identically the
same translation given above by Bickell,3 but without textual emendation.
There are those like J. A. Beet who see in the expression 'coals of fire' an
1
Op. cit.
2
According to Gesenius, Hebrew-English Lexicon, this verb is once applied to man (Ps. Hi. 7),
elsewhere always to fire or burning coals (Isa. xxx. 14: 'to take fire from the hearth'; Prov. vi. 27:
'carry fire in his bosom'). Koehler-Baumgartner indicate this root has a different meaning in Ps. lii. 7.
3
Dahood, op. cit. Dahood considers it less likely that 'coals of fire' here designates the passions,
the evil instincts, as is the case in Sirach viii. 10: 'Do not kindle the coals of a sinner, lest you be
burned in his flaming fire.' Skrinjar (op. cit.) also takes the word nrifl here as 'kindling'.

http://journals.cambridge.org Downloaded: 04 Apr 2015 IP address: 138.251.14.35

 C O A L S O F F I R E : SIGN O F R E P E N T A N C E O R R E V E N G E ? 343
1
'eastern metaphor for severe and overwhelming punishment'. Skrinjar too
speaks of intolerable suffering, 'the hate of the hater himself'.2 Few go as far
as H. Frankenberg in saying 'to heap fiery coals on someone's head signifies
to take vigorous revenge'.3
The above survey has shown that biblical scholars are uneasy about
accepting the literal meaning of this verse, especially the phrase, 'coals of
fire'. Those who have taken it literally must either emend the Old Testament,
or, as Dahood, reinterpret the meaning of the words; while those who do not
take it literally are far from agreed on its meaning. One group stresses the
pouring of coals of fire upon the head as punishment, others feel that it refers
to removal of potential punishment. It therefore becomes necessary to look
for new light elsewhere if this phrase is to be understood.

EGYPTIAN REPENTANCE RITUAL

An Egyptologist, Siegfried Morenz, has recently called our attention to a
striking parallel which has been known for sixty years but which has received
little attention from commentators. Even Morenz's article has received
little recognition and deserves to be noted here since it offers a solution to
this difficult figure of speech.4
Morenz calls our attention to the demotic narrative of Chaemwese in
which the carrying of coals of fire on the head was a religious ceremony
evidencing to the enemy the genuineness of the bearer's repentance. Now it
should be noted that it is not the coals of fire on the head which force
repentance or in any other way bring about repentance. They are the out-
ward evidence that repentance has taken place. The man in the Egyptian
narrative came back to the party whom he had wronged carrying a staff in
his hand and a tray of burning coals on his head.5 While there is in the
Egyptian narrative an allusion to the moral victory achieved it is clearly not
the kind of victory seen in the destruction of Sodom.6
The custom of carrying coals of fire on the head is not without analogues
1
J . A. Beet, A Commentary on St Paul's Epistle to the Romans (London, 1881), ad loc.
2
Op. cit.
' Die Spruche (Handkommentar zum Alten Testament, Gottingen, 1898), p. 142. Dahood agrees
that this is its meaning in biblical usage (op. cit.).
4
Op. cit.
6
Apparently the first publication of this material is F. L. Griffith, Stories of the High Priests of
Memphis (Oxford, 1900), who did not make the connexion with Proverbs, indeed who thinks of
punishment 'by beating and burning'. Perhaps E. von Dobschiitz is the first to ask the question
whether there may not be a connexion between this and Rom. xii. 20 in a review of Griffith's book
in Theologische Literaturzeitung (1901), col. 282 ff. The text Griffith prints is:' I will cause him to bring
this book hither, a forked stick in his hand and a censer offireupon his head' (p. 32). G. Raeder,
Altdgyptische Erzahlungen und Marchen (Jena, 1927), p. 150, cites it as follows: 'Ich will ihn zwingen,
dass er dieses Buch hierher zuruckbringt, indem ein gabelformiger Stock in seiner Hand und ein
Feuerbachen auf seinem Kopfe ist.'
8
One objection raised to the use of this material is that the Egyptian narrative in its written
form is apparently later than the Proverb. It must be observed, however, that the repentance ritual
may antedate the literary document.

http://journals.cambridge.org Downloaded: 04 Apr 2015 IP address: 138.251.14.35

 344 WILLIAM KLASSEN
in the Orient. In addition to the instances given above it is well known that
the humiliated person placed ashes on his head (II Samuel xiii. 19). The
ancient Assyrian laws provided that a prostitute should have bitumen
poured over her head if she veiled it against the law. In none of these cases
however do we have a completely analogous situation. At least in the latter
it would seem that the talion principle is expressed. That member of the
body which has been dishonoured is also to be punished.
In view of this evidence it is difficult to accept Paul Althaus' statement:
'Giite von dem als Feind Behandelten zu erfahren ist fur die feindselige
Gesinnung so unertraglich wie gliihende Kohlen auf dem Haupte: man
muB seine Haltung aufgeben.'1 It is possible to carry burning coals on
the head. Clay dishes have been discovered in Egypt dating prior to our
narrative which were used for the purpose of carrying coals of fire on the
head. A. Alt has indicated that it is the custom in Palestine when a need
arises to carry burning coals in the hands after putting a layer of ashes in
them.2
Having seen that the reference to coals of fire in Proverbs may have its
locus in an Egyptian repentance ritual it is still necessary to ask what
bearing this has on our understanding of the Pauline text. Could Paul have
known about such a usage of coals of fire?3 If not, in what sense did he
understand these verses? To answer this one must look at the Rabbinic
material.
RABBINIC INTERPRETATION OF PROVERBS XXV. 22
The Rabbinic interpretation of the proverb was not uniform. In one
homiletic application of Prov. xxv. 21 f. reference is made to Esther's invitation
of Haman when she fed her enemy but used her table as a snare to capture
her enemy (Esther v and Psalm lxix. 22). R. Jehoschua (c. 90) commented:
'She has learned from her early childhood what the meaning of the words is:
"If your enemy hungers, feed him with bread.'" Paul Billerbeck has ob-
served that the most common interpretation of the enemy is that it refers to
the evil impulse. Rabbi Schimon ben Eleazar (c. 190) draws a parallel
between this verse and a piece of iron which is kept in a fiery furnace. As
long as it is in the fiery furnace it is malleable. So also for the evil impulse:
as long as it is fed with the bread of the Torah it can be controlled. Rabbi
Eliezer (c. 90) refers to the words of the learned as being ' burning coals of
fire' but no application is made to this verse.
There is a late attempt to elucidate this verse which reads: 'With what
shall we compare this? With a baker who stood before the bakeoven; his
enemy comes, he scoops up glowing coals and places them upon his head.
1
Das Neve Testament Deutsch, 2; Der Brief an die Romer, p . 106.
a
The above material is taken from Morenz's article, cols. 189 f.
3
C. H. Dodd (op. cit.) differentiates between the meaning of the expression in Proverbs and
Paul.

http://journals.cambridge.org Downloaded: 04 Apr 2015 IP address: 138.251.14.35

 COALS OF F I R E : SIGN OF R E P E N T A N C E OR R E V E N G E ? 345
His friend comes and he takes out warm bread and gives it to him. The
glowing coals and the bread, both come out of the same oven, likewise God
dropped coals of fire on the Sodomites and manna upon the Israelites.'1

PAUL'S LINE OF THOUGHT

Since there is apparently no clue in pre-Christian Judaism to the way in
which Paul used this verse from Proverbs the interpreter of Paul's words
needs to go behind Paul's quotation to find the original meaning of the
expression, 'coals of fire'. Having done that he must make clear that he is
not ascribing that original meaning to Paul, but he is permitted to ask the
question whether the original meaning is in harmony with Paul's main point
in this particular passage. Does Paul's understanding of the way Christians
are to deal with their enemies fit into the original Egyptian repentance ritual
or does it fit better into a revenge motif?
In answering this question the broader New Testament teaching on
dealing with the enemy must be taken into account. Certainly as one looks
at Rom. xii. 14-21 the allusions to the Sermon on the Mount are striking.
C. H. Dodd comments that v. 21 'is an admirable summary of the teaching
of the Sermon on the Mount about what is called "non-resistance", and it
expresses the most creative element in Christian ethics'.2 A study of I Peter
also reveals that there is a consistency in the early Christian literature on this
point. Thus we are dealing here not with a point of view held by one author
but with one that pervades all the Christian literature. Even the Apocalypse
of John has as its dominant symbol a lamb which conquers through suffering
although the imagery is more involved in the apocalyptic material.
This consistency is the more remarkable when seen in contrast to the Old
Testament and the Qumran material. E. J. Sutcliffe has recently demon-
strated that while both the Old Testament and the Qumran literature
emphasize the command that the enemies of God are to be hated, even
though personal enemies are to be repaid with love, the New Testament
nowhere enjoins its readers to hate the wicked. This constitutes a major
difference from the attitude considered proper at Qumran. 3 The sectarians
are urged to 'love those whom (God) has chosen and to hate everyone whom
he has rejected'. They are encouraged to 'hate all the Sons of Darkness each
1
This Rabbinic material is taken from Paul Billerbeck, Kommntar zum Neuen Testament aus
Talmud und Midrasch (2nded.),m,3Oiff. It is also given in Paul Fiebig, 'Jesu Worte iiber die Feindes-
liebe', Theologische Studien und Kritiken, xci (1918), 30-64, who stresses that 'Die Grosse Jesu
besteht.. .darin, dass er mit prinzipieller Klarheit und Scharfe eine schrankenlose, auch iiber die
Schranken der Nationen hinausgehende, also wirkliche Menschenliebe fordert' (p. 39). His
treatment of'coals of fire' concludes that their purpose is to bring about a 'bitter, burning shame'
{ibid.).
a
Op. cit. p. 201.
3
On the Qumran material see E. J. Sutcliffe, 'Hatred at Qumran', Revue de Qumran, 11 (i960),
345-56, especially p. 353. Among the earlier studies S. Bartstra, ' Kolen vuurs Hoopen op iemands
Hoofd', Meuw Theologisch Tijdschnft, xxin (1934), 61-8, stresses the radical break Paul made with
Judaism on this point.

http://journals.cambridge.org Downloaded: 04 Apr 2015 IP address: 138.251.14.35

346 WILLIAM KLASSEN
according to his guilt with the vengeance of God' (iQS i. 10 f.).1 One finds
the exact opposite also: ' Nicht will ich einem das Bose vergelten, mit Gutem
verfolgen will ich den Kraftmenschen, denn bei Gott liegt das Gericht iiber
alles Leben und er vergilt jedem nach seinem Tun' (iQS x. 17 f.). In com-
menting on these words Schubert notes: ' I n contrast to the eschatological
attitude previously described of hating the enemy we have here an attitude
of personal forgiveness towards the man of might. Just as Jesus rejected the
eschatological hatred towards enemies so also he went further in his rejection
of personal hatred of enemies than the sect at En Feschka. I believe it is no
coincidence that Matthew v. 39 is a parallel only to the first part of the
quotation from the Manual of Discipline and not to the second. We can see
from this that the only reason they did not retaliate was because they were
trusting in the judgment of God.' 2
The significant difference between the New Testament and the Qumran
literature would appear however to lie at a different point, viz. the extent to
which the member of the community becomes an agent of God's vengeance.
In addition to the observation that Christians are never enjoined to hate
their enemies they are never seen as agents of divine vengeance. As Kurt
Schubert has noted: 'The motif that is predominant in the battle Scroll is
that of the eschatological disposition to fight against the enemies of God. The
wrath of God will be carried through by the members of the community.'*
Paul too has made reference to the opyr) (Rom. xii. 19). The Christian is
to make room for that. Yet he is not to retreat into quietism but is given a
positive alternative for action in the following verses. The strong adversative
dtAAd which introduces v. 20 indicates that Paul sees this as the positive
alternative open to the Christian in the presence of the enemy. The Christian
does not merely wait in expectation of God's judgement or vengeance nursing
his wounds with thoughts about the eventual punishment which God will
visit upon his enemy. He makes use of the interim to show the enemy that
Christ has made it possible for him to love not only the neighbour but also
the enemy. Paul surely is thinking here of the saying of Jesus: ' Do good to
those who hate you' (Luke vi. 27) and he supports this by citing the Proverb
that the best way to do good to your enemy is to take him into your home
and provide the essentials of life for him thus giving him concrete evidence
that you seek his good in spite of the fact that he seeks your ill.
It would seem that Paul is here concerned primarily with the responsibility
of the Christian just as throughout this chapter he has developed the theme
of the Christian responsibility of love. How does love express itself in the
1
The Qumran material on this theme is competently dealt with also by Victor Hasler, 'Das
Herzstiick der Bergpredigt, Matth. v. 21-48', Theologische £eitschrift, xv (1959), 90-106; Kurt
Schubert, 'Bergpredigt und Texte von En Fescha', Theologische Quartalschrift, cxxxv (1955), 320-37,
and most recently by Krister Stendahl,' Hate, Non-Retaliation and Love', Harvard Theological Review,.
LV (October 1962), 343~55-
2 3
Op. cit. pp. 334 f. Op. cit. p. 336.

http://journals.cambridge.org Downloaded: 04 Apr 2015 IP address: 138.251.14.35

 COALS OF F I R E : SIGN OF R E P E N T A N C E OR R E V E N G E ? 347
presence of the enemy? His answer is that it attacks the evil which is incarnate
in the enemy with weapons that nurture human welfare. In so doing they
are overpowering the evil ev TU &ycc0co. Whatever Chrysostom may have
said about the meaning of the image,' coals of fire', his customary perspicacity
can be seen when he says: ' Conquering by doing ill is one of the Devil's laws.
The character of Christ's race is so that it is not in the victory alone, but also
in the way of the victory that the marvel is the greater.. .. For he that hath
ill done him, has not an evil that taketh up its constant abode with him since
he is not the parent of it, but as he received it from others, he made it good
by his patient endurance.' 1
Paul's dominant concern does not seem to be the conversion of the enemy
directly but the method by which Christians overcome evil. The use of
VIK&GO here as elsewhere in the New Testament places the emphasis not on
man's efforts but on the victory achieved by Jesus Christ (John xvi. 33;
Luke xi. 22) and manifested in the life of the church (I John ii. 13 f.). In this
victory judgement certainly has a place, but it is a judgement which is
executed by means of prophetic words and actions which display Christ's
love within the community (I Cor. xiv. 24 f.). To the Romans tutored to
think that power can only be met with greater brute power this teaching
that the goodness of God is meant to lead even the enemy to repentance was
new not in a formal sense but in its underlying dynamic motive. Its novelty
lay in the life of One who had conquered through love.2
Undoubtedly Paul did not know of the existence of the ancient Egyptian
ritual of bearing coals of fire on the head. He surely knew however that
Elijah had once prayed that fire descend from heaven to devour his enemies
(II Kings i. 9-16). He also may have known that the disciples of Jesus once
asked: ' Lord, do you want us to bid fire come down from heaven and con-
sume (the Samaritans?)' (Luke ix. 54) and the response Jesus made on that
occasion. Most deeply, however, Paul had been impressed by the radical
way in which Jesus Christ had overcome evil on the cross and Paul did not
deviate from the early Christian consensus on this matter (cf. I Thess. v. 15).
In the light of this it would seem that the interpreter can apply the original
meaning of this image to Paul's thought without doing violence to it and also
without leaving the impression that Paul knew the original meaning of the
image. Certainly this is not the only place in Paul's writings where the
interpreter must go behind Paul to the meaning of the Old Testament. And
if we evade the dilemma of this verse by introducing the escape hatch of

1
The Homilies ofSt John Chrysostom (Oxford, 1841), pp. 390 f.
2
Sutcliflfe (op. cit. p. 355) calls attention to a passage in Tacitus which may offer evidence for how
widespread the Jewish teaching was that one should hate his enemy: 'Apud ipsos fides obstinata,
misericordia in promptu, sed adversus omnes alios hostile odium' (Hist, v, 5). Paul Althaus has well
observed that the reference to vengeance in this connexion does not mean that Christians are to
seek solace in God's future punishment. 'The apparent impotence in refusal to avenge bears within
it a powerful force: the force of God's earnest love' (op. cit. p. 106).

http://journals.cambridge.org Downloaded: 04 Apr 2015 IP address: 138.251.14.35

 348 WILLIAM KLASSEN
'paradox' we should at least know that a repentance ritual existed in
Egypt which made use of 'coals of fire' in a way that is strongly reminiscent
of the Proverbs passage.1 It is not a paradox that we have in this verse but a
scandal—the scandal of the cross.
Whatever one may make of the coals of fire image it is clear that Paul goes
beyond the Stoic method of absorbing evil passively into himself and re-
pressing his feelings towards the enemy who is persecuting him. Epictetus
lauds the ' pleasant strand that is woven into the Cynic's pattern of life; he
must needs be flogged like an ass, and while he is being flogged he must love
(cpiXsiv) the men who flog him, as though he were the father or brother of
them all'. 2 Epictetus also speaks with admiration of Lycurgus the Lace-
daemonian who had been blinded in one eye by one of his fellow-citizens and
then been given the opportunity by the people to take whatever vengeance
he might desire. He refrained from doing this and instead brought him up
and made a good man out of him and presented him in the theatre. When
the Lacedaemonians expressed their astonishment he said, 'This man when
I received him at your hands was insolent and violent; I am returning him
to you a reasonable and public-spirited person'.3 Greek literature contains
other examples of such a noble approach but it lacks a consistent motive for
such an application of the ethic of love and lacks the power which Christians
derive from Christ's victory over evil.
Nor does Paul leave his Roman readers with a choice between two
alternatives as Rabbinic Judaism did. For while some rabbis had great
praise for yielding and compromise, one finds also the opposite: for
example, ' If someone desires to kill you, beat him to the draw and kill him
first'. Or, 'if someone comes to kill you and you can overpower him, do not
hesitate and deliberate, but kill him immediately, as the saying goes,
"Preempt the murderer, before he kills you"'. In the case of an evil done
the rabbis supplied minute regulations for retribution.4
It is significant that Paul did not follow this aspect of Judaism. According
to Paul the Christian is not non-resistant in the face of evil nor is he stoically
passive. He is engaged in a campaign to overcome evil and he retaliates
with those weapons which Christ himself used: deeds of love and kindness.
1
Is it the premature flight into a 'paradoxical' solution which causes Michel to say: ' Viellekht
gab es in Agypten eine Sitte, nach der ein Sunder ein Kohlenbecken auf dem Haupt trug, um dem
Beleidigten genug zu tun' (Der Brief an die Romer (Gottingen, 1955), p. 279, our italics)? The
evidence would seem to justify more confidence than the timid ' vielleicht' and certainly offers little
support for the assumption that its purpose was 'Genugtuung'.
2
Epictetus, Discourses in, xxii, 54ff.(Loeb Classical Library).
8
Epictetus, Fragments 5. Waldmann (op. cit. pp. 54 f.) deals ably with this material and notes the
difference between love for the enemy and disdain for him as it is stoically expressed.
4
Paul Billerbeck, op. cit. 1, 341. The criticisms against Billerbeck's collection are to some extent
justified. However, in our approach we explicitly note that Paul is indebted to Judaism for his view,
but that he could very well have developed a different view also based on Jewish sources. For a
collection of noble Rabbinic material one can refer among others to the excellent article, ' Enemy,
Treatment of an' in The Jewish Encyclopedia (New York, 1903), v, 159-60 by David Philipson and
Fiebig {op. cit.).

http://journals.cambridge.org Downloaded: 04 Apr 2015 IP address: 138.251.14.35

 C O A L S O F F I R E : SIGN O F R E P E N T A N C E O R R E V E N G E ? 349
In the performance of these deeds he becomes the instrument that brings the
enemy to encounter Christ, which may eventually lead him to repentance.
Those who see in this passage the two strands, vengeance through judgement
and redemption through repentance (punitive and redemptive punishment)
should note that such a differentiation cannot be found in the Egyptian ritual
and that they presuppose a certain view of Paul's conception of judgement.1
It would seem that Paul is not stating that the Christian's deeds of love will
be a foretaste of final judgement and the coals of fire the enemy will receive
then.2 The coals of fire were evidence in the original ritual that repentance
had taken place and for Paul they probably signified that the enemy had been
made into a friend.3
If this is true then the interpretation so widely accepted by interpreters
that the coals of fire refer to shame, remorse, or punishment lacks all support
in the text. In the Egyptian literature and in Proverbs the 'coals of fire' is a
dynamic symbol of change of mind which takes place as a result of a deed of
love. This text offers a curious case in which the Egyptologist, the Old
Testament scholar and the New Testament student of Paul together can
arrive at a more precise meaning of a difficult verse. It affords also an
interesting illustration of the use of an Old Testament verse by a New Testa-
ment writer without fully penetrating the imagery that lies behind it.
It is not difficult to see why the older interpretation identifying coals of
fire with shame has been so widespread. It is psychologically true to human
experience and the original figure of speech is so obscure that the interpreter
was left with no other alternative.
Having seen the strategy Paul advises the Christian to use in dealing with
an enemy we should not prematurely dismiss this as a product of Paul's
supposed expectation of the Lord's imminent return.4 May it not be more
consistent to see in it the Hebrew-Christian approach to breaking the barriers
that arise among men and which cause some men to call others their enemies?
G. R. Cragg may be correct when he sees in this advice evidence of Paul's
own radical reversal of strategy and the history of the church has shown that

1
In particular one would need to ask to what extent Paul's concept of judgement follows that of
the prophets in which judgement is primarily seen as educative. It would seem that his main point
in Rom. xii deals with the Christian's attitude and actions towards enemies, and thus his concept of
judgement would not bear directly on this issue.
8
Yet there have been attempts by scholars to relate the redemptive and punitive interpretations
of this image. F. J. Leenhardt says: 'The practice, which was probably magical in origin, implied
either the execution of a punitive measure or the repentance of one who undertook voluntarily to
expiate his fault in this way. We may see here then, either the idea already expressed by the sugges-
tion of the "wrath" which executed punishment, or else the idea that the guilty man will repent at
the sight of the kindnesss shown to him by his victim' (The Epistle to the Romans (London, 1961),
ad loc). F. Lang also notes the paradoxical nature of the call to reconciliation in Proverbs and
agrees with Adolf Schlatter that since Paul refers to the wrath (v. 19) the coals offirehave a secondary
reference to the final judgement (see Lang's article on iriJp in Kittel, T.W.N.T. vi, 944).
s
According to Billerbeck (op. cit. p. 302) this interpretation is found in the Targum, hence
would have been most accessible to Paul.
4
So John Knox in Interpreter's Bible, ad loc.

http://journals.cambridge.org Downloaded: 04 Apr 2015 IP address: 138.251.14.35

350 WILLIAM KLASSEN

the method Paul here advocates does have fruitful results in many cases.1
Nevertheless the question Paul forces upon us in Rom. xii is not, ' How can
we transform society?' or 'How can we get results?' but 'What is the good,
acceptable and perfect will of God?' (Rom. xii. 2). By omitting the words
'and the Lord will reward thee' from the quotation from Proverbs Paul
emphasizes that such action is not based on an appeal to recompense but is a
genuine fruit of the Gospel. Wherever such methods do not grow naturally
out of the Gospel they cannot claim the support of Paul or Christ.
We may agree with C. H. Dodd then that we have here an expression of
the most creative element in Christian ethics but disagree with him in
ascribing to it the term 'non-resistance'. Paul says exactly the opposite.
The Christian's task is never to be 'non-resistant' in the face of evil. He
must overcome evil. To say that we have here the most creative element of
Christian ethics is only proper if we recognize that it came to Christianity
via Judaism, had its most pure representation in the life of Jesus and has
been sorely neglected in the history of Christianity. In a world concerned
about 'instant massive retaliation', and pre-emptive annihilation, when
Walter Kaufmann challenges the church with the statement: ' The new note
struck in the New Testament is personal revenge and eternal damnation' 2 it
may be in order to scrutinize the meaning of' coals of fire' again.
1
G. R. Cragg in Interpreter's Bible, ad loc.
2
Walter Kaufmann, Critique of Religion and Philosophy (New York, 1958), p. 180.

http://journals.cambridge.org Downloaded: 04 Apr 2015 IP address: 138.251.14.35