Diocletian and the Great Persecution

November 26, 2025 / Jason Conrad / Leave a comment

Nothing in the long history of Roman hostility toward Christians compares to what unfolded under Diocletian. Earlier persecutions were real and often severe, but under Diocletian the empire launched a decade-long, organized effort to dismantle Christianity itself. His political reforms, his religious worldview, and the system he created known as the Tetrarchy all collided with a rapidly growing Christian movement that refused to participate in Rome’s sacrificial life. The result was the largest and most systematic attempt ever made to extinguish the Christian name.

Understanding why the Great Persecution erupts with such force in 303 requires beginning with the political and religious system Diocletian put into place.

The Tetrarchy and the Ideology of Unified Rule

The formal Tetrarchy was established in AD 293, but the divine pairing of Diocletian and Maximian began earlier, when they ruled together as co-emperors. This divine alignment was already well established before Galerius and Constantius were added as Caesars.

A panegyric delivered before the Tetrarchy was formally created makes this divine association unmistakable:

Panegyrici Latini 10.4 (AD 289)
“Diocletian and Maximian, the one associated with Jupiter and the other with Hercules, govern the world with the majesty of the gods and the strength of heroes.”

This does not mean the emperors claimed personal divinity in the manner of Caligula or Domitian. They did not demand that sacrifices be offered to themselves. Instead, they presented themselves as ruling under Jupiter and Hercules, receiving divine legitimacy from these gods.

Under this political theology, unified worship was essential.
Sacrifice maintained the gods’ favor.
Refusal to sacrifice undermined the religious foundation that supported imperial stability.

When the Tetrarchy was formally created in AD 293, this divine framework expanded to include Galerius and Constantius as partners in the same cosmic order.

Diocletian’s Rise and His Vision for Stability

Fourth-century historian Aurelius Victor describes the turbulent origins of Diocletian’s reign:

Aurelius Victor, Epitome 39 (AD 360s)
“Diocletian, a man of low birth but keen mind, was hailed emperor by the army after Numerian had been treacherously slain.”

Diocletian inherited an empire weakened by half a century of civil war, invasion, inflation, and constant leadership changes. For him, restoring Rome required both administrative reconstruction and the renewal of Rome’s relationship with the gods.

His public image reflected this divine partnership. Inscriptions and coins throughout his reign repeatedly invoke the gods who upheld his rule:

IOVI CONSERVATORI
“To Jupiter the Protector”

HERCVLI DEFENSORI
“To Hercules the Defender”

GENIVS POPVLI ROMANI
“To the Guardian Spirit of the Roman People”

Obverse: **IMP DIOCLETIANVS P AVG** — “Emperor Diocletian, Dutiful Augustus,” radiate and cuirassed bust right.
Reverse: **IOVI AVGG** — “To Jupiter of the Emperors,” showing Jupiter standing facing, head left, holding a scepter and Victory on a globe; eagle at his feet to the left

These inscriptions show not emperor worship but emperor alignment. Diocletian ruled under Jupiter’s protection, not as Jupiter himself. Christian refusal to sacrifice therefore struck at the foundation of the very system that legitimized the Tetrarchy.

A Rapidly Expanding Christian Movement

By the early fourth century, Christian communities were thriving. Eusebius describes this moment as a period of remarkable growth and public visibility:

Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 8.1.1 (AD 311–325)
“Before the persecution, the churches were at peace and multiplied everywhere. Rulers honored the Christians. Crowds assembled in the churches. New buildings rose from their foundations in every city.”

Archaeology confirms this account. Christian buildings became larger and more numerous; clergy gained public recognition; and Christians entered civic roles and even imperial service. A movement that once met quietly in homes now built large structures in major cities.

For an imperial system built upon unified sacrifice, this expanding Christian public life created unavoidable tension.

Galerius and the Push Toward Hostility

Lactantius, an eyewitness to these events, identifies Galerius as the chief instigator behind the coming persecution:

Lactantius, On the Deaths of the Persecutors 11 (AD 313–315)
“Galerius, a man fierce in nature and hostile to the name of the Christians, urged the emperor daily to destroy the churches and to compel all to sacrifice.”

Galerius believed the empire’s troubles stemmed from neglect of the gods. Christian refusal to sacrifice was not private dissent but a direct challenge to Rome’s divine protection and the religious foundation of the Tetrarchy.

Diocletian hesitated for several years, but as pressure increased, he gradually shifted toward Galerius’s position.

Signs, Omens, and the Turning Point

Lactantius records a critical moment in AD 299, when the imperial household sought omens through a traditional sacrifice:

Lactantius, On the Deaths of the Persecutors 10 (AD 313–315)
“When Diocletian and Galerius consulted the oracle, the diviners declared that the presence of Christians had disturbed the sacred rites.”

Christians in the imperial service did not participate in the gestures of reverence. The diviners blamed them for the failure of the ritual. In a political system where divine favor upheld the rulers, this carried enormous weight.

Eusebius describes the resulting shift in Diocletian’s attitude:

Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 8.2.1 (AD 311–325)
“Diocletian was persuaded that the time had come to wage war against the churches as if against enemies of the state.”

By AD 302, the decision was near.
By early AD 303, it was set.

The Destruction of the Nicomedia Church

The Great Persecution opened with a symbolic act carried out at the political center of the Eastern empire. On February 23, AD 303, Diocletian ordered the destruction of the major church in Nicomedia. Lactantius, writing only a decade later, gives us a vivid description of what happened that morning:

Lactantius, On the Deaths of the Persecutors 12 (AD 313–315)
“On the morning of the day appointed for the celebration of the Terminalia, when the sun had not yet risen, the prefect together with tribunes and officers arrived at the church in Nicomedia, and having broken open the doors, they searched for the image of the god of the Christians, the Scriptures, and all that they used in their worship. When they found the Scriptures, they burned them; everything else they destroyed. The soldiers were allowed to seize whatever was found inside.”

The reference to the Terminalia, a festival dedicated to boundaries, is significant. Diocletian was drawing a line between the old religious order and the presence of Christianity in public life. By choosing this date, he signaled that the empire was redrawing its religious boundaries.

Eusebius, writing from within the Eastern provinces, confirms the same event from a different vantage point:

Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 8.2.4 (AD 311–325)
“The imperial edict commanded that the church in Nicomedia be leveled to the ground. Those who were present saw the building demolished from its foundations, and the sacred Scriptures committed to the flames.”

The two accounts, one Western and Latin (Lactantius) and one Eastern and Greek (Eusebius), give us the fullest picture we have of this opening blow.

The First Edict of 303

After the church was destroyed, Diocletian issued the first of four imperial laws. Lactantius reproduces the text in summary form, and his account is our primary source for its contents. According to him, the first edict contained four major provisions:

All churches were to be destroyed.
All Scriptures were to be burned.
Christians were to lose legal rights and protections.
Those in government positions were to be removed unless they sacrificed.

Here is the full text as preserved in Lactantius:

Lactantius, On the Deaths of the Persecutors 13 (AD 313–315)
“An edict was published ordering that the assemblies of the Christians should be abolished, that their churches be torn down, that the Scriptures be burned, that those who held places of honor be degraded, that servants who persisted in the Christian faith be made incapable of freedom, and that those under accusation of following Christianity be not allowed to defend themselves in court.”

The brutality of the law becomes clear as Lactantius explains its underlying logic:

Lactantius, On the Deaths of the Persecutors 13 (AD 313–315)
“The emperor believed that if he took away the opportunity of meeting for worship and destroyed their Scriptures, the religion itself could be abolished.”

This is the key sentence.
It shows the intent behind the Great Persecution: not merely to pressure Christians, but to erase the Christian movement by attacking its buildings, its Scriptures, and its legal status.

Refusal and Immediate Violence

Eusebius records the immediate resistance of some Christians in Nicomedia who tore down the imperial edict publicly:

Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 8.5.1 (AD 311–325)
“One of the Christians, moved with holy zeal, tore down the imperial edict that had been posted in a public place and put it into shreds as something profane and illegal.”

According to Eusebius, this man was arrested, tortured, and executed. His act represents one of the earliest martyrdoms of the Great Persecution.

Impact Across the Empire

The First Edict was carried out differently in East and West. In the East, where Galerius wielded influence, the laws were enforced strictly. Eusebius describes widespread destruction:

Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 8.2.5 (AD 311–325)
“Churches were torn down from top to bottom, and the sacred Scriptures were cast into the fire in the open marketplaces.”

In the West, Constantius enforced the law only minimally. Churches were destroyed, but he did not pursue Christians or burn Scriptures with the same severity. As Lactantius notes:

Lactantius, On the Deaths of the Persecutors 15 (AD 313–315)
“Constantius, although he destroyed a few buildings, spared the Christians themselves and took no delight in their suffering.”

This divergence becomes much more pronounced in the years that follow. The edicts will be applied ruthlessly in the East and with comparative restraint in the West.

The Second Edict: Imprisonment of the Clergy

The First Edict had targeted buildings, Scriptures, and legal rights. When this failed to break Christian resolve, the imperial court issued a second command. This time, the goal was to dismantle the leadership of the churches.

Lactantius provides the clearest account:

Lactantius, On the Deaths of the Persecutors 15 (AD 313–315)
“Diocletian published another edict, ordering that all the bishops and ministers should be thrown into prison.”

This marked a dramatic escalation. It was not aimed at all Christians, but at the entire structure that led and organized Christian communities.

Eusebius confirms the severity in the Eastern provinces:

Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 8.6.1 (AD 311–325)
“An edict was issued that all who were called ministers of the Word should be seized and committed to prison. And there was nothing mild in the execution of this command.”

Prisons filled rapidly. Eusebius writes:

Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 8.6.6 (AD 311–325)
“The prisons, which had previously held murderers and robbers, were now filled with bishops, presbyters, deacons, readers, and exorcists.”

This detail is important.
It shows the scale of the arrests and also how the empire quickly ran out of space to hold so many clergy.

The Third Edict: Forcing the Clergy to Sacrifice

By late 303, the prisons were overflowing. Rather than release the clergy, the imperial court issued a third edict directing that all imprisoned leaders be compelled to sacrifice.

Lactantius writes:

Lactantius, On the Deaths of the Persecutors 16 (AD 313–315)
“A third edict commanded that all those in prison should be forced by every means to sacrifice.”

The phrase “by every means” implies torture, starvation, deprivation, and psychological pressure. Eusebius describes what happened in the East:

Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 8.6.8 (AD 311–325)
“Some endured every form of punishment in the attempt to force them to sacrifice; they suffered rackings, burnings, and all kinds of torment.”

Some clergy yielded. Many did not.
Those who refused were either kept imprisoned or executed.

The Fourth Edict: Universal Sacrifice

The fourth edict marked the full and final escalation. While the first three focused on property and clergy, the fourth edict extended to every Christian, commanding everyone to sacrifice to the gods or face punishment.

Lactantius states:

Lactantius, On the Deaths of the Persecutors 17 (AD 313–315)
“A fourth edict was issued ordering that all persons, without exception, should sacrifice and taste the offerings.”

This was the heart of the Great Persecution.
For the first time in Roman history, a universal law required every Christian in the empire to sacrifice on pain of imprisonment, torture, or death.

Eusebius describes the impact:

Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 8.6.9 (AD 311–325)
“The command was given that all the inhabitants of the cities should be compelled to sacrifice and pour libations to the idols. Those who refused were subjected to various punishments.”

This edict brought the entire Christian population into direct conflict with the state.

Diverging Paths: East and West

The edicts applied to the whole empire, but enforcement differed dramatically.

The Western Provinces

Constantius, ruling in Gaul and Britain, enforced only part of the First Edict. He destroyed some church buildings but refused to persecute Christians themselves.

Lactantius remarks on this restraint:

Lactantius, On the Deaths of the Persecutors 15 (AD 313–315)
“Constantius, though he destroyed a few buildings, did not harm the Christians and took no pleasure in their suffering.”

Under Constantine (after 306), persecution ceased entirely in the West.

The Eastern Provinces

The East was ruled first by Diocletian and Galerius, then by Galerius alone, and finally by Maximinus Daia. Here the edicts were enforced with full severity for nearly a decade.

Eusebius records the intense suffering that followed:

Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 8.9.1 (AD 311–325)
“In the regions under the rule of Maximinus an unbroken series of evils overwhelmed the Christians.”

This distinction between East and West explains why the Great Persecution lasted much longer in some regions. The universal sacrifice edict was enforced fiercely in the East and only lightly in the West.

The Scale of the Persecution

The four edicts created the most comprehensive legal assault Christianity ever faced:

• Churches destroyed
• Scriptures burned
• Legal rights removed
• Clergy imprisoned
• Clergy forced to sacrifice
• All Christians required to sacrifice
• Severe punishments for refusal
• Enforcement lasting nearly a decade in the East

This was not a short moment, like the requirement under Decius.
This was an attempt to eradicate Christian identity, its leadership, its Scripture, and its existence as a public movement.

The Height of the Persecution

After the fourth edict extended the requirement of sacrifice to every Christian in the empire, the persecution entered its most violent phase. This period, stretching from 303 through the early 310s in the East, produced scenes of cruelty unmatched in earlier Roman history. Eusebius and Lactantius, both eyewitnesses to portions of these events, provide detailed accounts of torture, imprisonments, and executions across the provinces.

Torture and Public Punishments

Eusebius describes how the authorities attempted to break Christian resolve with punishments designed to terrify the entire population.

Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 8.7.1 (AD 311–325)
“Some were scourged with whips, torn by the rack, and stretched out upon instruments of torture; some were burned with fire; others were crucified; some were beheaded; many were condemned to the mines or to the wild beasts.”

He emphasizes that these punishments were not isolated incidents but part of a coordinated effort:

Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 8.7.2 (AD 311–325)
“The cruelty of the governors was such that no words can adequately describe the variety and severity of their torments.”

Lactantius gives similar testimony, describing how the persecutors operated with deliberate intent to inflict suffering:

Lactantius, On the Deaths of the Persecutors 18 (AD 313–315)
“Those who refused to sacrifice were tortured with every kind of instrument, and the cruelty of the judges seemed to have no end.”

These statements establish the environment of terror that spread through the Eastern provinces.

The Persecution in Egypt

Egypt experienced some of the most intense violence. Eusebius, who lived in Caesarea but had deep ties to Egypt, records the ferocity of the punishments in Alexandria:

Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 8.9.4 (AD 311–325)
“In Alexandria countless numbers were put to death. Some were beheaded; others burned; others cast into the sea; others given to the sword. The massacre continued day after day.”

He describes the courage of the martyrs:

Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 8.9.5 (AD 311–325)
“Not even the women were spared; they endured the same tortures as the men, and many met their end with remarkable courage.”

Egypt’s large Christian population meant that resistance was strong, and so was the response of the authorities. The violence continued for years.

The Suffering in Palestine

Eusebius’s Martyrs of Palestine (an appendix to his Ecclesiastical History) is one of the most detailed regional martyr narratives from the ancient world. In Part 4 of the main history, he describes the beginning of the violence:

Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 8.8.1 (AD 311–325)
“In Palestine, the persecutions were incessant. Every day brought new trials, and the judges devised new forms of torture.”

Some Christians were mutilated:

Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 8.8.3 (AD 311–325)
“Some had one eye gouged out, others had the joints of their ankles burned or severed, and thereafter were sent to the copper mines.”

Others were executed publicly:

Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 8.9.6 (AD 311–325)
“Many were beheaded or burned alive, so that the flames and the sword together took their daily victims.”

These passages give a vivid picture of the relentless and creative brutality that characterized the persecution in Palestine.

The Persecution Under Maximinus Daia

When Diocletian and Maximian abdicated in AD 305, the persecution did not end. Instead, it intensified in the East under Maximinus Daia, nephew of Galerius. Eusebius portrays his rule in especially dark terms:

Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 8.14.1 (AD 311–325)
“Maximinus, more cruel than any before him, inflamed with an unbounded hatred of the Christians, drove all to madness by his tyrannical measures.”

Under Maximinus, local officials were encouraged to compete in displays of cruelty, and mobs were incited to attack Christian communities.

Eusebius writes:

Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 9.2.1 (AD 311–325)
“The provinces under Maximinus were filled with executions; the tortures were carried out not only in the cities but in every village and district.”

This period saw some of the most gruesome executions in recorded Christian history.

The Attempt to Eradicate Christian Scripture

One of the defining features of the Great Persecution was the attempt to eliminate Christian Scripture. This was a continuation of the First Edict, which targeted the sacred writings. Eusebius describes systematic searches:

Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 8.2.5 (AD 311–325)
“The sacred Scriptures were sought out with diligence, and when found, they were burned in the open squares.”

Lactantius adds:

Lactantius, On the Deaths of the Persecutors 12 (AD 313–315)
“They burned the Scriptures with fire, believing that if the writings were destroyed the religion itself would perish.”

This attempt to eliminate Christian Scripture sets the Great Persecution apart from all earlier Roman actions.

The Persecution of Bishops and Teachers

Because bishops and teachers played a central role in community identity, the authorities targeted them specifically. Eusebius emphasizes how the persecution dismantled Christian leadership:

Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 8.6.6 (AD 311–325)
“The prisons, which had previously been filled with criminals, were now crowded with bishops, presbyters, deacons, readers, and exorcists.”

This was not incidental. Destroying the leadership was essential to the imperial plan. Without clergy, the Christian movement would lose cohesion. Without bishops, the sacraments could not be administered. Without teachers, instruction would cease.

Crucifixion, Mutilation, and the Mines

The Great Persecution included punishments that earlier emperors rarely used against Christians, including crucifixion. Eusebius documents instances where believers were nailed to crosses:

Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 8.7.5 (AD 311–325)
“Some were nailed to crosses, others were stretched out on them while still alive.”

Condemnation to the mines was common:

Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 8.12.1 (AD 311–325)
“Many were sent to the mines in Lebanon, Cilicia, and Palestine, with one eye mutilated and the joints of the ankles burned.”

These punishments were intended not only to kill but to degrade and terrorize.

The Emotional Weight of the Persecution

Eusebius breaks from his usual historical tone when describing the intensity of the suffering:

Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 8.12.3 (AD 311–325)
“It is impossible to recount the sufferings of the martyrs one by one, for the cruelty of the tyrants exceeded all bounds.”

This statement from an eyewitness underscores why the Great Persecution stands apart in scale and severity.

Galerius Struck with Illness

For nearly eight years after the first edict, the persecution raged most violently in the Eastern empire under Galerius and, later, Maximinus Daia. But in AD 310–311, Galerius was struck by a sudden and horrifying disease. Lactantius describes the illness in graphic detail, presenting it as divine judgment.

Lactantius, On the Deaths of the Persecutors 33 (AD 313–315)
“A malignant ulcer broke out in the secret parts of Galerius’s body, which gradually spread and ate into his vitals; from it issued a stench so foul that it was impossible for any man to endure it.”

The disease worsened over time:

Lactantius, On the Deaths of the Persecutors 33 (AD 313–315)
“It became a torpid mass of corrupt flesh, breeding worms which no medical skill could remove. The surgeons cut away decayed pieces, but the wound only grew larger.”

Eusebius confirms the same picture:

Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 8.16.2 (AD 311–325)
“He was reduced to such a condition by an incurable disease that even his physicians could no longer approach him because of the unbearable stench.”

In this agony, Galerius made a decision no one expected.

Galerius Issues the Edict of Toleration (AD 311)

On April 30, AD 311, Galerius issued an imperial proclamation ending the persecution he had driven for a decade. Lactantius preserves the text in full. This is the earliest surviving imperial law granting legal status to Christianity.

Here is the complete edict, without abbreviation:

Lactantius, On the Deaths of the Persecutors 34 (AD 313–315)
“Among the other measures that we have taken for the advantage of the empire, we had desired first of all to set everything right in accordance with the ancient laws and public discipline of the Romans. We therefore sought to restore the worship of the gods who sustain our empire, believing that the Christians had abandoned the religion of their ancestors.

Since, however, many persisted in their purpose, and since we saw that they neither paid reverence to the gods nor worshipped them, we therefore judged it necessary to command that they return to the practices of the ancients.

Yet because many obeyed not our decrees but endured all kinds of suffering, and because they showed that they could in no way be turned from their purpose, we are compelled by our utmost indulgence to extend pardon to them, so that once more they may be Christians and may build the places in which they gather, always provided that they do nothing contrary to good order.

It will be required of them that they pray to their God for our safety and that of the empire, and for their own, so that the state may be preserved in security on every side and that they may live in peace within their own dwellings.”

This is one of the most extraordinary documents in Roman history.
The man who insisted Christianity must be destroyed now publicly acknowledges:

the Christians endured suffering,
they could not be broken,
and the imperial court now permits them to exist again.

After Galerius: Maximinus Daia Continues the Persecution

Although Galerius reversed imperial policy in 311, the violence did not end everywhere. In the Eastern provinces under Maximinus Daia, persecution continued until 313.

Eusebius describes Maximinus’s renewed hostility:

Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 9.1.2 (AD 311–325)
“Maximinus, inflamed with greater rage than before, would not permit the decree of Galerius to be carried out in his provinces.”

He incited cities to petition for continued persecution:

Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 9.2.4 (AD 311–325)
“Some of the cities sent formal petitions requesting that the Christians be forbidden to inhabit their lands. Maximinus eagerly granted such requests.”

It is only after Maximinus’s military defeat in 313 that Christianity finally receives full legal protection in the East.

Constantine and Licinius End the Persecution (AD 313)

In early 313, Constantine and Licinius met in Milan and jointly agreed to extend full toleration across the empire. Although the exact text survives in a provincial copy preserved by Lactantius, its purpose is clear: to restore full freedom to Christian communities.

The proclamation states:

Lactantius, On the Deaths of the Persecutors 48 (AD 313–315)
“We resolved to grant both to the Christians and to all others full authority to observe whatever worship they choose, so that whatever divinity resides in heaven may be favorable to us and to all who are under our authority.”

By this point:

Constantius had always been mild in the West
Constantine ended persecution in 306
Galerius ended the persecution in 311 in his realms
Maximinus’s defeat in 313 ended the last violent enforcement

Thus, AD 313 marks the end of the Great Persecution, nearly ten years after it began.

The Long Aftermath

Eusebius depicts the rejoicing of Christian communities once the persecution ceased:

Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 10.2.1 (AD 311–325)
“After the tyrants had been removed, God wiped away every tear from their eyes, and the festival of freedom was celebrated throughout the cities.”

Churches were rebuilt.
Leaders returned from exile.
Scriptures were recopied.
The memory of the martyrs became foundational to Christian identity.

The Great Persecution had failed.
Instead of destroying Christianity, it had purified and strengthened it.

Eyewitness Martyr Testimonies and Christian Voices During the Persecution

To understand the intensity of the Great Persecution, it is necessary to hear the voices of those who lived through it. Beyond the narratives of Lactantius and Eusebius, several eyewitness accounts survive describing the sufferings of Christians across the empire. These texts record the trials, tortures, and executions of believers who endured the decade between 303 and 313. Their voices form one of the richest collections of primary sources from early Christian history.

The Martyrs of Palestine

Eusebius’s Martyrs of Palestine is among the most detailed eyewitness accounts of martyrdom from the ancient world. Written between AD 311 and 313, it describes the executions he witnessed in Caesarea and the surrounding regions.

Apphianus

The story of Apphianus is among the most vivid:

Eusebius, Martyrs of Palestine 4.7–8 (AD 311–313)
“Apphianus was struck repeatedly on the face, yet his courage did not falter. When they wrenched his limbs with instruments of torture, he remained unshaken in his purpose. They wrapped his feet in linen steeped in oil and set them on fire. Then they bound heavy stones to him and cast him into the sea.”

Procopius

Eusebius also records the martyrdom of Procopius, a reader in the church:

Eusebius, Martyrs of Palestine 1.2 (AD 311–313)
“Procopius was brought before the governor. When he refused to sacrifice, he was immediately beheaded, sealing his testimony with the sword.”

Agapius and the Beasts

One of the most dramatic scenes takes place in the amphitheater:

Eusebius, Martyrs of Palestine 6.3 (AD 311–313)
“Agapius was sentenced to the wild beasts. When he confessed Christ boldly, the beasts were let loose upon him, and he met his end with steadfast courage.”

Pamphilus and the Scholars

Eusebius’s own mentor and teacher, Pamphilus of Caesarea, was martyred along with a group of scholars:

Eusebius, Martyrs of Palestine 11.1 (AD 311–313)
“Pamphilus, the most admirable of men, endured imprisonment for two years. After countless tortures, he and his companions were put to death.”

The Alexandrian Martyrs

Alexandria remained one of the largest Christian centers in the empire, and the persecution struck it with unusual violence.

Eusebius writes:

Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 8.9.6 (AD 311–325)
“Some were burned, some were drowned, some beheaded, some given to the sword, and others cast into the fire. The massacre continued day after day.”

Peter of Alexandria

Peter, bishop of the city, was executed in AD 311:

Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 8.13.2 (AD 311–325)
“Peter, who presided over the church in Alexandria, was arrested and beheaded, giving a noble example to the flock.”

Phileas of Thmuis

Phileas, another Egyptian bishop, wrote an eyewitness letter describing the prisons and tortures. Eusebius preserves part of it:

Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 8.10.2–3 (AD 311–325)
“Phileas wrote in detail of the sufferings of the blessed martyrs: how they stood firm under countless torments, how the judges exhausted themselves in devising new forms of cruelty, and how the martyrs endured everything with admirable patience.”

The Egyptian Confessors Sent to the Mines

Among the most horrifying scenes is the mutilation and transportation of Egyptian confessors to the mines of Palestine.

Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 8.8.3 (AD 311–325)
“Some had the one eye gouged out, others had the joints of their ankles burned or severed. Then they were sent to the mines, bearing in their bodies the marks of Christ’s sufferings.”

These punishments were intended to break morale and terrorize Christian communities.

Martyrdom in Syria and Asia Minor

While Palestine and Egypt preserve the richest martyr narratives, persecution also raged throughout Syria and Asia Minor.

Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 8.12.1 (AD 311–325)
“Throughout Syria and the regions beyond, countless numbers were sent to the mines after being mutilated in their eyes and feet.”

And in a passage describing Maximinus Daia’s reign:

Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 9.2.1 (AD 311–325)
“The provinces under Maximinus were filled with executions, both in the cities and in the villages.”

The Martyrdom of Lucian of Antioch

Lucian, a priest and renowned biblical scholar, was executed in AD 312 at Nicomedia.

Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 9.6.3 (AD 311–325)
“Lucian, a man distinguished for his skill in the divine Scriptures, sealed his testimony at Nicomedia, offering a noble example of endurance.”

Methodius of Olympus

Methodius, an important theological writer, was martyred near the end of Galerius’s reign. Though Eusebius does not describe the details, Jerome preserves the tradition:

Jerome, On Illustrious Men 83 (AD 392)
“Methodius, bishop of Olympus, suffered martyrdom at the end of the reign of Galerius.”

His death represents the loss of one of the era’s great Christian thinkers.

Peter of Alexandria’s Pastoral Letters

Peter, the martyred bishop of Alexandria, wrote pastoral letters during the persecution addressing those who had lapsed under torture.

Peter of Alexandria, Canonical Letter 4 (AD 306–311)
“Those who betrayed the faith under the compulsion of torture must be received with mercy after they have shown due repentance, for they fell under force and not of their own will.”

These letters show how deeply the persecution impacted Christian pastoral life and discipline.

Restoration Inscriptions and Archaeological Witnesses

After the persecution ended, inscriptions commemorated the rebuilding of destroyed churches. One from North Africa reads:

Cirta inscription (Numidia), c. 315
“Restored from the ruins of the persecution.”

Archaeological evidence also preserves burn layers, smashed furnishings, and remnants of hidden Scriptures, confirming the literary accounts of destruction.

Conclusion: The Decade Rome Tried to Erase the Church

The Great Persecution stands alone in the history of the Roman Empire. Earlier persecutions were real and often severe, but none matched the scale, duration, coordination, or intent of the measures launched between AD 303 and 313. Across the Eastern empire especially, Christians faced a comprehensive legal and physical assault designed not merely to punish them but to erase their Scriptures, dismantle their leadership, destroy their churches, and compel all believers to abandon their faith.

The laws progressed step by step until the entire Christian population fell under their weight. Churches were torn down, Scriptures burned, clergy imprisoned, clergy tortured, and finally all Christians forced to sacrifice under threat of death. The edicts touched every element of Christian life.

The purpose is stated clearly in the primary sources. Lactantius records Diocletian’s reasoning with stark precision:

Lactantius, On the Deaths of the Persecutors 13 (AD 313–315)
“He believed that if he took away the opportunity of meeting for worship and destroyed their Scriptures, the religion itself could be abolished.”

No earlier emperor had attempted something so broad, so systematic, or sustained for so many years.

The Witness of the Martyrs

The eyewitness narratives from the period show Christians suffering with extraordinary courage. These testimonies were not written decades later. They are contemporary accounts of real people, recorded by those who saw them.

Apphianus in Caesarea stood firm under repeated blows, brutal torture, and finally death by drowning:

Procopius was executed in a single stroke for refusing to sacrifice.
Agapius went to the beasts and met them with fearless confession.
Pamphilus, mentor of Eusebius, endured two years of imprisonment before being put to death.
Phileas of Thmuis described the judges exhausting themselves in inventing new torments.
The Egyptian confessors bore mutilated bodies as marks of their faith.
Lucian of Antioch sealed his testimony at Nicomedia.
Methodius of Olympus, a profound Christian thinker, was killed late in the persecution.
Peter of Alexandria guided his flock with pastoral letters, then faced martyrdom himself.

These names, and many more whose stories survive only in fragments or inscriptions, represent a generation of Christians who stood firm when Rome sought to destroy their faith at its roots.

Eusebius summarizes their endurance with solemn simplicity:

Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 8.13.12 (AD 311–325)
“In all these trials the athletes of religion shone with patient endurance, for they held fast to their faith with unshaken resolve.”

The Failure of the Persecution

Despite the severity of the laws and the brutality of their enforcement, the persecution ultimately failed.
It failed because Christians refused to abandon their faith.
It failed because Scripture was recopied even while authorities burned it.
It failed because the bishops and clergy held the communities together under unimaginable pressure.
It failed because Christian identity proved stronger than imperial coercion.

Galerius, the chief architect of the persecution, acknowledged this failure publicly in his Edict of Toleration:

Lactantius, On the Deaths of the Persecutors 34 (AD 313–315)
“Since many obeyed not our decrees but endured all kinds of suffering, and since they showed that they could in no way be turned from their purpose, we are compelled by our utmost indulgence to extend pardon to them.”

The persecutor confessed that he could not break the Christians.
He allowed them once again to gather, rebuild, and worship.

Restoration After the Storm

Once Maximinus Daia was defeated in 313, the last remnants of persecution collapsed. Constantine and Licinius extended full religious freedom to all:

The rebuilding began immediately. Eusebius describes the rejoicing of Christian communities:

Inscriptions across the empire testify to this restoration:

Cirta inscription (Numidia), c. 315
“Restored from the ruins of the persecution.”

Churches were rebuilt larger than before. Scriptures were recopied. Clergy returned from exile. Communities gathered openly. The names of the martyrs were honored. The memory of their courage became foundational to Christian identity and theology.

A Final Reflection

The Great Persecution did not destroy Christianity. It revealed its strength.
It did not silence Christian witness. It amplified it.
It did not weaken the church. It purified and deepened it.

The empire had attempted to extinguish the Christian faith by burning its Scriptures, breaking its leadership, and torturing its people. Instead, Christianity emerged from this decade more unified, more resilient, and more firmly rooted in the conviction that no earthly power could overcome the truth of the gospel.

When the persecution ended, Christianity did not merely survive.
It stood on the threshold of transformation.
Within a single generation, emperors who once sought its destruction would support its growth and honor its martyrs.

The Great Persecution remains one of the defining moments in Christian memory:
a testimony to suffering, endurance, and the unwavering faith of those who stood firm when the world pressed hardest against them.

When Philosophy Fought Back: Porphyry Against the Christians

November 26, 2025November 27, 2025 / Jason Conrad / Leave a comment

The later third century, roughly AD 260 to 305, was not a calm moment for Christianity. It was the most shaken, destabilized, and vulnerable moment the Roman Empire had experienced since the fall of the Republic. The empire’s myths of invincibility had shattered. The perception that the gods protected Rome had collapsed. No event demonstrated this more brutally than the humiliation of Emperor Valerian in the AD 250s.

Pagan historian Aurelius Victor gives the most chilling description of the moment:

“Valerian was captured in battle and taken into Persia. They kept him there until he died, and after his death they stripped the skin from his body along with the imperial purple.”
Aurelius Victor, Epitome of the Caesars 33.4

This was not just a military defeat. It was a cosmic humiliation. Rome’s entire self-identity trembled. People questioned everything: the order of the universe, the protection of the gods, the meaning of tradition, the future of the empire.

At the same time, Christianity was rising. Christianity had not collapsed under Decius. It had not shattered under Valerian. It grew and spread. It acquired intellectual converts. It developed Scriptures, bishops, and theological schools. It formed moral communities that stood out in a collapsing world. Even the elite philosophical schools of Rome were encountering Christian arguments face to face.

This is where Porphyry enters the story. He was born around AD 232 and lived into the early AD 300s. He grew up in a world where Rome was cracking, yet Christianity was accelerating.

The World That Formed Porphyry: Plotinus and the Defense of the Ancient Tradition

Porphyry came to Rome around AD 263 and became a student of Plotinus, one of the most revered philosophers of antiquity. His biography of Plotinus, written later, gives us rare insight into the intellectual environment that shaped his thinking.

Porphyry writes:

“Plotinus seemed ashamed of being in the body. He refused to speak about his birth, his parents, or his homeland, and was so ashamed of being in the body that he would not allow anyone to make a portrait of him. He said it was enough to bear the likeness of the body in which he was clothed.”
Life of Plotinus 1

Plotinus’s disdain for the body, for history, and for physicality formed the foundation of Porphyry’s worldview. Christianity, with its proclamation of a God who takes on flesh, enters time, suffers, dies, and rises in a body, contradicted everything Plotinus considered philosophically exalted.

Plotinus also condemned new religious movements that claimed to supersede ancient wisdom. Porphyry records:

“Certain people who had recently taken up teaching began to speak arrogantly, pretending that they had discovered the complete truth, though they perverted the doctrines of the ancients and invented fictions of their own.”
Life of Plotinus 3

And again Porphyry writes:

“Many others who had recently come forward asserted that they had discovered the complete truth, though they corrupted the oracles of the ancient sages and fabricated fictions of their own.”
Life of Plotinus 16

Scholars broadly agree that Plotinus is referring here to Christians, whose claims of a new revelation threatened the philosophical tradition he defended.

Porphyry also records one of the earliest direct testimonies of a philosophical debate between pagans and Christians. A Christian named Antoninus was part of Plotinus’s circle. Porphyry writes:

“Among those who came to Plotinus was also a certain Antoninus, who had forsaken the old religion and embraced the doctrine of the Christians. Plotinus argued with him many times, attempting to turn him away from these opinions, but could not succeed. Antoninus held firmly to the Scriptures of the Christians and would not give them up.”
Life of Plotinus 3

This is extraordinary. Plotinus, the greatest philosopher of his age, debated a Christian convert and was unable to win him back.

Porphyry witnessed all of this. He watched Christianity enter the philosophical elite. He watched his own teacher fail to defeat a Christian convert. This moment planted the seed of Porphyry’s later hostility.

What Plotinus Taught Porphyry About Scripture, Myth, and Truth

Porphyry also records Plotinus’s view that sacred texts must not be interpreted literally:

“Plotinus declared that myths and sacred writings must not be taken literally, but understood allegorically, for the literal meaning was often absurd.”
Life of Plotinus 22

This is the principle Porphyry later applies to Christian Scripture.

Plotinus insisted that true wisdom was ancient and that new movements were false. Porphyry writes:

“Plotinus taught that the ancient philosophers had already discovered the truth, and that the doctrines of those who had recently arisen were false and filled with contradictions.”
Life of Plotinus 18

Porphyry accepted this fully.

Christianity was recent.
Christianity contradicted ancient wisdom.
Therefore Christianity must be false.

Plotinus also revered the ancient gods:

“Plotinus had a reverence for the gods and delighted in the ancient rites, saying that they were established by wise men of old and should be preserved.”
Life of Plotinus 23

Porphyry embraced this same reverence and used it to criticize Judaism and Christianity for destroying images, rejecting rituals, and breaking from ancestral customs.

Porphyry’s Fifteen-Book Against the Christians

Somewhere between AD 270 and 300, Porphyry composed his massive fifteen-volume polemic titled Against the Christians. Christian emperors later condemned and destroyed it. The order survives in the Theodosian Code, issued under Theodosius II in AD 448:

“The books of Porphyry, written against the religion of the Christians, shall be sought out and burned with fire.”
Theodosian Code 16.5.66 (AD 448)

Because the work was destroyed, we depend on later authors who quoted Porphyry in order to refute him. Whenever one of these sources appears for the first time in this script, it receives a brief introduction so the reader knows who they are.

Porphyry’s surviving arguments attack every foundation of the Christian movement:

Moses and the Pentateuch.
The historical books of Scripture.
The Gospels.
Paul.
Christian prophecy, especially Daniel.
Christian miracles.
Christian exclusivism.
Christian literalism.
Christian rejection of images.
Jewish dietary laws that early Christians inherited.
Christian abandonment of ancestral customs.
Christian claims of new revelation.

Porphyry’s Attack on Moses and the Pentateuch

Our first witness is Eusebius of Caesarea, the early fourth-century Christian historian who wrote Church History and Preparation for the Gospel. Eusebius quotes Porphyry in order to refute him. From him we learn that Porphyry denied Mosaic authorship:

“Porphyry impugns Moses and says the writings attributed to him are not by him, but by others long after his time.”
Eusebius, Preparation for the Gospel 1.9

Porphyry also argued that Moses borrowed from Greek philosophy, reversing the Christian idea that Greek wisdom borrowed from Israel.

Porphyry’s Attack on the Gospels

Macarius Magnes was an early fourth-century Christian writer who composed a dialogue titled the Apocriticus. In it he quotes a pagan critic at length before responding. Scholars agree that the arguments he preserves come directly from Porphyry’s Against the Christians.

Macarius records Porphyry saying:

“The evangelists were unskilled men and of no education. Their writings are devoid of art. They show not malice but lack of ability.”
Apocriticus 3.2

Macarius also preserves Porphyry accusing the Gospels of contradiction:

“Your writings are full of contradictions. One says one thing. Another writes something different. Each evangelist follows his own fancy.”
Apocriticus 2.6

And again:

“You are compelled to make up explanations to make them agree.”
Apocriticus 3.9

Porphyry even challenges the resurrection appearances:

“Why did Jesus not show himself openly after he rose? Why did he appear only to a few? A god should have shown himself to all.”
Apocriticus 3.9

Porphyry’s Attack on Paul

Augustine of Hippo, writing in the late fourth and early fifth centuries, preserves Porphyry’s criticism of Paul in The City of God:

“Porphyry reproaches Paul for abandoning the law and introducing new doctrines.”
Augustine, City of God 19.23

Porphyry believed Paul corrupted the original Jewish faith and created a dangerous innovation.

Porphyry’s Attack on Christian Literalism

Macarius preserves Porphyry’s criticism of how Christians read Scripture:

“Your Scriptures contain myths and fables no better than the tales of the Greeks.”
Apocriticus 4.21

Porphyry argues that Christians interpret their writings in the most literal and unsophisticated way possible.

Porphyry’s Attack on Christian Exclusivism

The next source is the Suda, a massive tenth-century Byzantine encyclopedia that preserves brief quotations from older writers. It records Porphyry’s complaint:

“Porphyry wrote that the Christians forsake the customs of their ancestors and presume to condemn all others.”

This is one of the earliest pagan descriptions of the Christian claim that salvation comes only through Christ.

Porphyry’s Attack on Christian Miracles

In addition to the Gospels and Paul, Porphyry challenged the Christian claim that miracles proved Jesus was divine. Augustine of Hippo, writing in the early fifth century, preserves this line of argument. Augustine quotes Porphyry directly in The City of God, where he records Porphyry arguing that Jesus’ miracles were not unique at all:

“There are many others who have worked wonders no less than Jesus, yet they are not on that account gods.”
Augustine, City of God 10.32

For a philosopher formed by Plotinus, miracles proved nothing.
Medicine, magic, and religion could all produce wonders.
Jesus, Porphyry argued, belonged to a wider class of healers and holy men who never claimed to be divine.

Macarius Magnes preserves a similar statement from Porphyry’s lost work:

“If Jesus performed miracles, so have many others before him. Why then do you call him God when others who have done the same things are not gods?”
Apocriticus 3.6

For Porphyry, miracles were not evidence of divine identity.
They were common features of the ancient world.
Christians, he insisted, were naïve for treating them as proof.

Porphyry’s Attack on Christian Epistemology

Porphyry also attacked Christianity at its strongest point — its claim that the resurrection, apostolic testimony, Scripture, and the moral transformation of believers together provided a compelling reason for belief.

Macarius Magnes preserves Porphyry’s criticism of the Christian appeal to faith:

“You Christians have no demonstration for what you believe. You accept everything on faith alone, without proof.”
Apocriticus 4.19

This is one of the earliest explicit arguments that Christianity lacks philosophical evidence.

Porphyry demanded the kind of demonstration valued by the Platonic schools.
Christians responded that history, revelation, eyewitness testimony, prophetic fulfillment, and moral transformation constituted a different kind of proof.

Eusebius, writing in the early fourth century in direct response to Porphyry, explained it this way:

“Our faith is not based on clever reasoning but on the power of truth shown in deeds.”
Eusebius, Demonstration of the Gospel 1.5

Porphyry forced Christian writers to clarify the nature of Christian evidence.
They insisted they were not offering abstract philosophical argument but historical testimony to events God had done.

Porphyry’s Attack on Jewish and Christian Dietary Practices

Another preserved piece of Porphyry’s work comes from his treatise On Abstinence from Animal Food. In this work, Porphyry discusses the practices of several cultures, including the Jews. His comment is brief but revealing:

“The Jewish nation abstains from swine and certain other animals, not for reasons of purity, but because of ancient ancestral customs.”
On Abstinence 2.36

This statement is significant for two reasons.

First, Porphyry denies that Jewish dietary laws reflect divine command.
Second, he treats these customs as merely ethnic and cultural.

Early Christians inherited aspects of this Jewish debate and were still wrestling with food laws in the second and third centuries. Porphyry’s dismissal of these practices as “ancestral customs” fits with his larger claim that Christian practices were human inventions, not divine revelations.

Porphyry’s Attack on Jewish and Christian Views of Images

Porphyry also wrote a separate work titled On Images, in which he defended the philosophical value of pagan images, statues, temples, and rituals. Although the work does not survive, Eusebius preserves Porphyry’s arguments.

Eusebius tells us:

“Porphyry says images are symbols that lift the mind to the gods, and that the Jews are impious for destroying them.”
Eusebius, Preparation for the Gospel 3.6

This helps us understand two important points.

First, Porphyry believed that pagan worship involved profound symbolism, not superstition.
Second, he saw Jewish and Christian hostility to images as ignorant, impious, and culturally destructive.

Christianity’s refusal to honor images — its refusal to sacrifice, its refusal to join civic rituals, and its rejection of pagan temples — was, in Porphyry’s eyes, a direct assault on everything wise and ancient in the empire.

For Porphyry, the ancient rites deserved respect. Christians, he believed, were tearing down the cultural world that preserved truth.

Porphyry’s Appeal to Pagan Oracles

Porphyry did not only defend pagan tradition.
He argued that the gods actively revealed truth through the ancient oracles.

He wrote a now-lost work titled On the Philosophy from Oracles.
Much of it was destroyed by Christian emperors, but Eusebius preserves a summary:

“Porphyry says that the gods speak in oracles and reveal to us the ways of virtue and truth.”
Eusebius, Preparation for the Gospel 4.7

This is crucial for understanding Porphyry’s worldview.

For Porphyry:

The gods reveal truth through ancient rituals.
The philosophers preserve this truth through reason.
The ancestral traditions embody this truth through symbol and rite.

Christianity, in his eyes, had none of this.
It was recent, literalistic, exclusive, and dismissive of the traditions that carried the wisdom of antiquity.

This is why Porphyry regarded Christianity not as harmless but as culturally and philosophically dangerous.

Porphyry’s Attack on Daniel

Porphyry’s longest and most detailed attack focused on the Book of Daniel. More of his words survive here than on any other topic because the Christian scholar Jerome quoted him extensively in his fourth-century Commentary on Daniel.

Jerome explains Porphyry’s argument this way:

“Porphyry wrote his twelfth book against Daniel, denying that he was a prophet, but asserting that all the things narrated in his book happened in the past, under Antiochus Epiphanes, and that Daniel did not predict the future but reported the past in the form of prophecy.”
Jerome, Commentary on Daniel 11.5

Porphyry argued that Daniel’s predictions were too accurate regarding the events of the second century BC.
He concluded the book was written during the Maccabean crisis, not in the sixth century BC.

Jerome quotes Porphyry further:

“Nearly all the things he relates in this chapter have been fulfilled. He tells of Antiochus who fought against the king of Egypt. But he lies when he adds other things which did not take place at all.”
Jerome, Commentary on Daniel 11.5

Porphyry’s point was simple.
Daniel describes historical events accurately until a certain point.
After that point the predictions fail.
Therefore, Daniel was a historical narrative pretending to be prophecy.

Jerome’s frustration is evident.
He admitted:

“Porphyry followed the history so closely that he cannot be refuted except by saying that Daniel truly foretold the future.”
Jerome, Commentary on Daniel 11.5

For Christians, Daniel was foundational evidence that God reveals future events.
Porphyry’s attack struck at the heart of Christian apologetics.

Hierocles: A Roman Governor Attacking Christianity During the Persecution

At the same time Porphyry was sharpening the philosophical attack against Christianity, another voice emerged from within the Roman administration itself. Hierocles was a high-ranking Roman governor under Diocletian, first in Bithynia and later in Alexandria. Around the very moment the Great Persecution began in AD 303, he composed a work titled Philalethes (“Lover of Truth”), one of the most important pagan attacks on Christianity from the early fourth century.

Unlike Porphyry, Hierocles was not a philosopher speaking from a school.
He was a Roman official speaking from authority.
His critique reveals how Christianity was viewed by those charged with protecting the Roman order.

Eusebius, who lived through the same period, wrote a direct refutation titled Against Hierocles between AD 310 and 313 and quotes Hierocles at length.

Hierocles’s central claim was that Jesus was nothing special and that Christians foolishly exalted Him above other wise men such as Apollonius of Tyana. Eusebius preserves the argument clearly:

“Hierocles endeavors to show that Apollonius was more divine than Jesus, and reproaches us for worshipping Him whom he calls an ordinary man, while we overlook Apollonius, who performed more wonderful deeds.”
Eusebius, Against Hierocles 1 (AD 310–313)

Hierocles insists that Jesus accomplished nothing unique:

“He asserts that Jesus performed nothing remarkable, but that the apostles invented tales of His miracles out of foolishness, whereas Apollonius, he says, displayed greater power and wisdom.”
Against Hierocles 2

He mocks Christians for exclusive devotion to Jesus:

“He accuses us of folly, saying that while we overlook many men who have performed great deeds, we have exalted Jesus alone, though He accomplished nothing worthy of such honor.”
Against Hierocles 4

He even compares their trials:

“He says that Apollonius, when tried by the emperors, displayed courage and divine power, whereas Jesus, dragged before Pilate, showed nothing divine and suffered an inglorious death.”
Against Hierocles 4

He attacks Christian Scripture:

“He mocks us for preferring the barbaric writings of the Christians to the wise and philosophical doctrines of the Greeks.”
Against Hierocles 3

He denies Christian moral superiority:

“He says that what we admire in Christian conduct is found more beautifully among the philosophers, who taught moderation, justice, and wisdom long before.”
Against Hierocles 5

He mocks Christian intellectual status:

“He derides the simplicity of the faith, calling it the belief of unlearned men who know nothing of true philosophy.”
Against Hierocles 3

And he attacks Christian miracle claims:

“He says that the deeds attributed to Jesus are neither new nor extraordinary, for many have worked similar wonders, yet none of these are worshipped as gods.”
Against Hierocles 4

His conclusion is blunt:

“He declares that Christians have been deceived by exaggeration, exalting Jesus beyond measure, when in reality He was no greater than many others.”
Against Hierocles 1

Hierocles therefore stands beside Porphyry as one of the clearest voices opposing Christianity just as the Great Persecution began. He represents the mindset of Roman officials who saw Christianity not only as theologically dangerous but socially destabilizing and philosophically unimpressive.

Christian Responses to Porphyry

Porphyry triggered more Christian responses than any pagan writer before him.
Entire works were written to refute him.

Eusebius of Caesarea

In the early fourth century, he wrote Preparation for the Gospel and Demonstration of the Gospel intended as philosophical and historical weapons against Porphyry.

Eusebius openly acknowledges the scale of the challenge:

“Porphyry has written against us with no small skill.”
Eusebius, Preparation for the Gospel 1.1

Methodius of Olympus

In the late third century, he wrote a multi-volume refutation titled Against Porphyry.
The work is mostly lost.

Apollinaris of Laodicea

In the mid-fourth century, he wrote another large response to Porphyry.
Also mostly lost.

Augustine of Hippo

In the early fifth century, he addressed Porphyry multiple times in The City of God.

Augustine admits:

“Porphyry’s writings disturb many, for he was most subtle in his arguments.”
Augustine, City of God 19.22

Jerome

In the late fourth century, he quoted Porphyry’s arguments against Daniel and wrote a full-scale defense of the book as true prophecy.

The sheer number and scale of these responses show how deeply Porphyry’s arguments penetrated Christian thought.

Porphyry and the Road to the Great Persecution

Porphyry’s work did not lead to persecution by itself.
But his ideas shaped the intellectual atmosphere in which Diocletian’s Great Persecution began in AD 303.

Porphyry argued that:

Christianity rejected Rome’s ancestral customs.
Christianity undermined pagan wisdom.
Christianity destroyed images and temples.
Christianity refused to sacrifice.
Christianity misread ancient texts.
Christianity invented new doctrines.
Christianity was a danger to Roman identity.

These are the same themes echoed in Diocletian’s edicts, which demanded:

the destruction of Christian Scriptures
the destruction of churches
the removal of Christians from public office
the arrest of clergy
and the restoration of ancestral rites

Porphyry was not a politician.
But he helped provide the philosophical justification for a state-driven attempt to suppress Christianity.

His intellectual assault and Diocletian’s political assault belong to the same moment.
The empire tried to protect its cultural inheritance and turned to force when argument failed.

Conclusion: Why Porphyry Still Matters

Porphyry’s criticisms remain the foundation of many modern skeptical arguments:

That Daniel was written after the events it “predicts.”
That the Gospels contradict one another.
That miracles do not prove divinity.
That Christians rely on faith rather than proof.
That Christian practices came from Jewish custom rather than divine mandate.
That Christianity is a late and dangerous innovation.

Porphyry was the first to articulate these critiques in a systematic way. He understood Christianity well enough to attack it where it seemed strongest.

Christianity did not survive Porphyry because his arguments were weak. It survived because its historical claims, its prophetic confidence, and its communities of endurance were stronger than any philosophical challenge.

Porphyry represents the moment when philosophy fought back with full force. And Christianity answered with its own witness, writings, and courage.