first-corinthians-15

If These Seven Letters Were All We Had: The Christian Faith Would Still Stand

/ Jason Conrad / Leave a comment

Imagine that every Gospel manuscript disappeared. Acts was lost. The disputed letters of Paul vanished. Hebrews, James, Peter, John, Jude, and Revelation were gone. No creed, council, catechism, or theological work survived.

Imagine even that the complete manuscripts of Israel’s Scriptures were no longer available to us.

Only seven documents remained:

  • Galatians
  • First Thessalonians
  • First Corinthians
  • Second Corinthians
  • Romans
  • Philippians
  • Philemon

What would we lose?

We would lose the continuous story of Jesus’ life. We would no longer have his parables, miracles, exorcisms, birth stories, baptism, temptation, Sermon on the Mount, journey through Galilee, trial before Pilate, or the accounts of women discovering the empty tomb.

We would lose an enormous amount of history, teaching, poetry, prophecy, and spiritual wisdom.

But we would not lose Christianity.

Within these seven letters, we would still possess enough to identify the God Christians worship, the Jesus they confess, the gospel they proclaim, the salvation they receive, the Spirit who transforms them, the practices that gather them, the moral life expected of them, and the future for which they hope.

We would still know how to become Christian, how to worship as Christians, how to live as Christians, how to form Christian communities, and how to die with Christian hope.

The seven letters do not contain everything Christians can know. They contain everything necessary to identify Christianity’s essential structure.

They are not the whole library, but the faith remains alive within them.

Sufficient Does Not Mean Exhaustive

When I say that the seven letters contain all the Christianity we need, I do not mean that every question has been answered.

Paul does not provide a continuous biography of Jesus. He does not give us a complete system of church government. He does not explain every detail of baptism, the Lord’s Supper, heaven, hell, marriage, leadership, spiritual gifts, or the relationship between divine grace and human freedom.

He does not supply the later language of the Nicene Creed or the theological definitions produced at Chalcedon. He does not address many moral questions created by modern medicine, technology, economics, or warfare.

The seven letters are also occasional correspondence. Paul is writing to communities he has already taught. He answers questions, settles disputes, corrects behavior, and reminds people of things they previously received.

He says to the Corinthians:

“I praise you because you remember me in everything and hold firmly to the traditions just as I delivered them to you.”

First Corinthians 11:2

The letters therefore assume earlier teaching and relationships that are not fully preserved.

Nevertheless, enough remains to reconstruct the load-bearing structure of the faith. A house contains more than its foundation and supporting walls, but without those structures it ceases to be a house. The seven letters preserve the parts without which Christianity would cease to be Christianity.

We Would Know the One God Christians Worship

The seven letters do not introduce a new deity called “the Christian God.”

Paul proclaims the God of Israel as the one God of Jews and Gentiles, the Creator of all things, the Judge of humanity, and the Father who raised Jesus from the dead.

Paul writes:

“Is God the God of Jews only? Is he not also the God of Gentiles? Yes, of Gentiles also, since God is one.”

Romans 3:29-30

He tells the Corinthians:

“We know that an idol is nothing in the world and that there is no God except one. Even if there are so-called gods in heaven or on earth, as there are many ‘gods’ and many ‘lords,’ for us there is one God, the Father, from whom all things come and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we exist.”

First Corinthians 8:4-6

From the seven letters alone, we would know that Christians are not worshiping one regional deity among many. They confess one Creator from whom everything comes and one Lord through whom everything exists.

We would know that this God judges evil, keeps his promises, shows mercy, raises the dead, adopts people as his children, gives his Spirit, and intends to liberate creation from death.

Christianity would still begin with the God of Abraham, the God of Israel, and the Creator of the world.

We Would Know Who Jesus Was

The seven letters do not give us a biography of Jesus, but they do not present him as an undefined heavenly spirit.

Paul identifies Jesus as a real Jewish human being.

“God’s gospel concerns his Son, who was descended from David according to the flesh and was appointed Son of God in power, according to the Spirit of holiness, by his resurrection from the dead: Jesus Christ our Lord.”

Romans 1:3-4

Paul also writes:

“When the fullness of time came, God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under the law, to redeem those under the law so that we might receive adoption.”

Galatians 4:4-5

From these passages, we would know that Jesus was born as a human being, born Jewish, born under the law, and descended from David. We would know that he had a brother named James whom Paul personally met:

“I saw none of the other apostles except James, the Lord’s brother.”

Galatians 1:19

We would know that Jesus had followers during his life, that some of those followers traveled with believing wives, and that leaders named Cephas, James, and John were known within the earliest movement.

Paul also preserves teachings attributed directly to Jesus. When discussing divorce, he distinguishes the Lord’s command from his own pastoral judgment:

“To the married I give this command, not I but the Lord: a wife should not separate from her husband. If she does separate, she should remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband, and a husband should not divorce his wife.”

First Corinthians 7:10-11

Paul also knows that Jesus taught that those who proclaim the gospel may receive support:

“In the same way, the Lord commanded that those who proclaim the gospel should receive their living from the gospel.”

First Corinthians 9:14

The seven letters give us only fragments of Jesus’ earthly teaching. Yet those fragments are enough to show that Paul did not know Jesus merely as an idea produced by his own imagination.

We Would Know About Jesus’ Final Meal

Even without the Gospels, we would know that Jesus gathered his followers for a meal on the night he was betrayed.

Paul reminds the Corinthians of a tradition he had already delivered to them:

“I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you: on the night when the Lord Jesus was betrayed, he took bread, gave thanks, broke it, and said, ‘This is my body, which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.’ In the same way, after supper, he took the cup and said, ‘This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Whenever you drink it, do this in remembrance of me.’ Whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.”

First Corinthians 11:23-26

This passage gives us a remembered event, words attributed to Jesus, an interpretation of his approaching death, and a practice repeated by Christian communities.

We would know that Jesus anticipated his death, connected it with a covenant, commanded his followers to remember him through bread and wine, and expected the practice to continue until his return.

Without a Gospel, Christians would still possess the Lord’s Supper.

We Would Know the Central Gospel

The heart of Christianity would remain unmistakable.

Paul tells the Corinthians that the message he delivered was not something he had recently invented. He had received it and passed it on:

“I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the Twelve. After that he appeared to more than five hundred brothers and sisters at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have died. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, and last of all he appeared also to me.”

First Corinthians 15:3-8

From this one passage, we would know that:

  • Jesus died.
  • His death was interpreted as being for sins.
  • He was buried.
  • God raised him.
  • His resurrection fulfilled Israel’s Scriptures.
  • He appeared to Cephas.
  • He appeared to the Twelve.
  • He appeared to a large gathering.
  • He appeared to James.
  • He appeared to the apostles.
  • Paul claimed that Jesus appeared to him personally.
  • This proclamation existed before Paul delivered it to Corinth.

We would not possess the Gospel stories about the women discovering the empty tomb. Paul does not narrate that event. We would still possess burial, resurrection, named appearances, and Paul’s firsthand claim that he saw the risen Jesus.

We would also know that the resurrection was not understood as the survival of Jesus’ memory or the continued existence of his disembodied spirit. Paul argues for the transformation and resurrection of the body:

“Christ has been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have died. Since death came through a human being, the resurrection of the dead also comes through a human being. As all die in Adam, so all will be made alive in Christ.”

First Corinthians 15:20-22

Paul’s gospel is not simply that Jesus continued to exist somewhere after death. It is that God defeated death by raising him and that his resurrection began what God intends to do for those who belong to him.

Without the Gospels, the Christian gospel would remain.

We Would Know That Jesus Is Lord

The seven letters do more than describe Jesus as a dead teacher whom God restored to life. They place him at the center of Christian worship.

Paul addresses Christians as people who call upon Jesus:

“To the church of God in Corinth, to those sanctified in Christ Jesus and called to be saints, together with everyone everywhere who calls upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.”

First Corinthians 1:2

Calling upon the Lord was biblical language for worshiping and seeking help from God. Paul now describes Christians everywhere as people who call upon Jesus.

Philippians preserves an even more elevated confession:

“Though he existed in the form of God, he did not regard equality with God as something to use for his own advantage. Instead, he emptied himself, taking the form of a servant and becoming human. He humbled himself by becoming obedient to death, even death on a cross. Therefore God highly exalted him and gave him the name above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven, on earth, and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.”

Philippians 2:6-11

Christians confess Jesus as Lord, pray in his name, belong to him, imitate him, gather around his table, and await his return.

The seven letters do not give us the later technical language of one divine essence and three persons. They do give us the reality that later Christians attempted to describe with that language: the one God is Father, Jesus is confessed as Lord, and the Holy Spirit is experienced as God’s active presence within his people.

We Would Know Why Humanity Needs Salvation

The seven letters describe humanity as trapped beneath sin, idolatry, injustice, corruption, and death.

Paul refuses to divide the world into innocent insiders and guilty outsiders:

“There is no distinction, because all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. They are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.”

Romans 3:22-24

The human problem is not merely ignorance. People know enough about goodness to condemn evil in others while practicing evil themselves. They serve created things rather than the Creator. Sin distorts desire, damages relationships, enslaves the will, and ends in death.

Christianity would therefore remain more than a program for self-improvement.

Humanity cannot educate, discipline, legislate, or argue itself out of death. God must act.

We Would Know How God Saves

Paul describes salvation through several images.

He speaks of justification, in which God places sinners in the right through grace. He speaks of redemption, in which people are liberated from slavery. He speaks of reconciliation, in which enemies are restored to God. He speaks of adoption, in which people become God’s children. He speaks of participation in Christ, in which believers share in his death and resurrection.

Paul writes:

“While we were still weak, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly. Rarely will someone die for a righteous person, though perhaps someone might dare to die for a good person. But God demonstrates his love for us in this: while we were still sinners, Christ died for us.”

Romans 5:6-8

He tells the Corinthians:

“If anyone is in Christ, there is a new creation. The old has passed away, and the new has come. All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation. God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them.”

Second Corinthians 5:17-19

Paul does not reduce Christ’s work to a single theory. Christ dies for sinners, bears the curse, reconciles enemies, defeats death, inaugurates new creation, and joins believers to himself.

Salvation is received through faith rather than earned as human achievement:

“We know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ. We have believed in Christ Jesus so that we might be justified through faith in Christ and not by works of the law.”

Galatians 2:16

Yet Paul never treats faith as permission to remain unchanged:

“In Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision accomplishes anything. What matters is faith working through love.”

Galatians 5:6

Without Romans, Galatians, and Second Corinthians, later Christians would debate salvation differently. With these letters, Christianity’s essential announcement remains clear: salvation is God’s gift in Christ, received through faith, creating a new life expressed through love.

We Would Know How Someone Enters Christ

The seven letters assume that people respond to the gospel through faith, confession, repentance, reception of the Spirit, and baptism.

Paul writes:

“If you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.”

Romans 10:9

He describes baptism as participation in Christ’s death and resurrection:

“Do you not know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were buried with him through baptism into death so that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we also might walk in newness of life.”

Romans 6:3-4

He tells the Galatians:

“All of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is no longer Jew or Greek, slave or free, male and female, because you are all one in Christ Jesus.”

Galatians 3:27-28

The seven do not settle every later debate about baptism. They do not tell us the age of every recipient, the precise amount of water used, or how baptism relates chronologically to every other aspect of conversion.

They establish something more basic: baptism belonged to Christianity from its earliest secure documents and signified entrance into Christ, participation in his death and resurrection, and incorporation into a new community.

We Would Know the Holy Spirit

Christianity in the seven letters is not merely a decision to agree with certain doctrines.

God gives the Holy Spirit.

The Spirit pours God’s love into human hearts, assures believers that they are God’s children, intercedes in their weakness, distributes gifts, produces holiness, and transforms people into the image of Christ.

Paul writes:

“Those who are led by the Spirit of God are God’s children. You did not receive a spirit of slavery leading back into fear. You received the Spirit of adoption, by whom we cry, ‘Abba, Father.’ The Spirit himself bears witness with our spirit that we are God’s children.”

Romans 8:14-16

The Spirit also produces a recognizable moral life:

“The fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control. Against such things there is no law.”

Galatians 5:22-23

The Father, Son, and Spirit appear together in the life and worship of the community:

“There are different gifts, but the same Spirit. There are different forms of service, but the same Lord. There are different activities, but the same God who works all of them in everyone.”

First Corinthians 12:4-6

Without later creeds, Christians would still know the Father who sends, the Lord Jesus who saves, and the Spirit who indwells and transforms.

We Would Know What the Church Is

The church in Paul’s seven letters is not primarily a building, denomination, government, or cultural institution.

It is an assembly of people called by God, joined to Christ, and made into one body by the Spirit.

“Just as the body is one and has many parts, and all the parts of the body, though many, are one body, so also is Christ. In one Spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, slaves or free, and we were all given one Spirit to drink.”

First Corinthians 12:12-13

These communities practice baptism and the Lord’s Supper. They pray, sing, prophesy, teach, give, discern, appoint leaders, correct destructive behavior, reconcile offenders, care for the poor, and send workers into new places.

Paul mentions apostles, prophets, teachers, overseers, deacons, and people who labor among the churches. He does not provide a single complete system of church government.

The seven establish the church’s identity more clearly than its later institutional structure. The church is the body of Christ, the temple of God’s Spirit, and a family in which former divisions are being overcome.

Even Philemon, the shortest of the seven, shows how the gospel enters an unequal Roman household. Paul asks Philemon to receive Onesimus:

“No longer as a slave, but more than a slave, as a beloved brother. He is especially dear to me, but even more to you, both in the flesh and in the Lord.”

Philemon 16

Paul does not issue a complete political program for abolishing Roman slavery. He does something that begins pressing against the institution from within: he places enslaved and free people inside the same family and requires them to recognize one another as brothers.

We Would Know How Christians Are Called to Live

The moral life of the seven letters is not a miscellaneous collection of rules. It is a life reshaped around the cross of Christ and the love of God.

Paul teaches Christians to reject sexual exploitation, greed, idolatry, drunkenness, dishonesty, envy, rage, revenge, and the use of freedom to harm others.

He commands them to forgive, work honestly, remain faithful, support the weak, welcome strangers, share with the poor, honor conscience, bear burdens, pursue peace, and love enemies.

Paul writes:

“Bless those who persecute you. Bless and do not curse. Rejoice with those who rejoice and weep with those who weep. Live in harmony with one another. Do not repay anyone evil for evil. If possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone. Do not take revenge, but leave room for God’s judgment. If your enemy is hungry, feed him. If he is thirsty, give him something to drink. Do not be conquered by evil, but conquer evil with good.”

Romans 12:14-21

He summarizes Christian morality through love:

“Owe no one anything except to love one another, because the one who loves another has fulfilled the law. The commandments, ‘Do not commit adultery,’ ‘Do not murder,’ ‘Do not steal,’ ‘Do not covet,’ and any other commandment are summed up in this statement: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ Love does no wrong to a neighbor. Therefore, love is the fulfillment of the law.”

Romans 13:8-10

Paul’s churches did not live this perfectly. First Corinthians proves how chaotic an early Christian community could become. The existence of correction demonstrates that conversion did not instantly remove selfishness, rivalry, lust, pride, or greed.

But the direction of the Christian life remains clear. Grace does not merely forgive the old life. The Spirit begins creating a new one.

We Would Know That Christians Must Care for the Poor

Concern for the poor is not an optional social interest added to Christianity in modern times.

When Paul describes his agreement with James, Cephas, and John concerning his Gentile mission, he remembers one particular request:

“They asked only that we remember the poor, which was the very thing I was eager to do.”

Galatians 2:10

Paul then spends substantial portions of First and Second Corinthians organizing relief for impoverished believers in Jerusalem.

He does not command identical possessions or forced equality. He does insist that abundance carries responsibility:

“I do not mean that others should have relief while you are burdened, but that there should be fairness. At the present time, your abundance should supply their need, so that their abundance may someday supply your need. In this way there will be fairness.”

Second Corinthians 8:13-14

A Christianity reconstructed from the seven letters could never be reduced to private belief, personal prosperity, or escape to heaven.

It would be a community in which faith works through love and resources move toward people who are suffering.

We Would Know How Christians Face Suffering

The seven letters do not give a philosophical explanation for every instance of suffering.

They do not tell us why one child becomes sick, why one family experiences tragedy, or why God allows one prayer to appear unanswered. Paul never claims that Christians will solve every mystery before they can trust Christ.

Instead, he places suffering beneath the cross and resurrection.

“We rejoice in our sufferings, knowing that suffering produces endurance, endurance produces tested character, and tested character produces hope. This hope does not disappoint us, because God’s love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit who was given to us.”

Romans 5:3-5

Paul does not speak as someone protected from pain. He describes beatings, imprisonment, hunger, rejection, anxiety, weakness, and the possibility of death.

He also refuses to let suffering become the final interpreter of reality:

“We are afflicted in every way, but not crushed; perplexed, but not driven to despair; persecuted, but not abandoned; struck down, but not destroyed. We always carry the death of Jesus in our body so that the life of Jesus may also be revealed in our body.”

Second Corinthians 4:8-10

Christianity does not promise that every question will be answered. It announces that suffering and death do not have the final word because God raised Jesus.

We Would Know the Christian Hope

The seven letters end the Christian story not with souls escaping creation but with Christ returning, the dead being raised, and creation being liberated.

Paul comforts grieving believers in Thessalonica:

“We do not want you to be uninformed about those who have died, so that you do not grieve like others who have no hope. Since we believe that Jesus died and rose again, in the same way God will bring with Jesus those who have died in him.”

First Thessalonians 4:13-14

He tells the Romans that creation itself awaits freedom:

“Creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of the one who subjected it, in hope that creation itself will be liberated from its slavery to decay and brought into the freedom and glory of God’s children.”

Romans 8:20-21

He tells the Corinthians:

“The trumpet will sound, the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. This perishable body must put on imperishability, and this mortal body must put on immortality. Then the saying that is written will come true: ‘Death has been swallowed up in victory.’”

First Corinthians 15:52-54

Without Revelation, Christians would still expect Christ’s return, resurrection of the dead, judgment, transformation, victory over death, and liberation of creation.

The map would contain fewer details, but the destination would remain.

We Would Still Have to Read Israel’s Story

Saying that the seven letters contain Christianity’s essential structure does not mean that Christianity can be severed from the Old Testament.

Paul’s gospel is rooted in Israel’s Scriptures.

He says that the gospel was:

“Promised beforehand through God’s prophets in the Holy Scriptures.”

Romans 1:2

He tells the Romans:

“Whatever was written in the past was written for our instruction, so that through endurance and the encouragement of the Scriptures we might have hope.”

Romans 15:4

Paul builds his arguments around Adam, Abraham, Sarah, Hagar, Moses, the Exodus, the law, the prophets, Israel’s worship, and God’s promises.

Even the resurrection proclamation says that Christ died and was raised “according to the Scriptures.”

If complete Old Testament manuscripts disappeared, the seven letters would still carry large portions of Israel’s story within them. We would know far less, but we would know that Christianity belongs to that story and cannot be understood as worship of a different God.

The seven are therefore sufficient as a historical anchor, but they do not authorize Christians to despise the Scriptures that formed Paul’s world.

We do not need to solve every historical problem in the Old Testament before considering whether God raised Jesus. But if we accept Paul’s gospel, we inherit his conviction that the God who raised Jesus is the God of Israel.

The Seven Give Us a Basis for Christian Unity

Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant Christians disagree about authority, church government, sacraments, saints, Mary, predestination, justification, ministry, tradition, and the interpretation of Scripture.

Those disagreements are not imaginary, and not every difference is unimportant.

Yet before later councils, denominational systems, and theological controversies, the seven letters already give us a recognizable Christian faith:

  • One Creator and God of Jews and Gentiles
  • Jesus Christ, God’s Son and our Lord
  • His real humanity and Jewish identity
  • His death for sins
  • His burial and resurrection
  • His appearances to named witnesses
  • His exaltation and future return
  • Salvation by God’s grace received through faith
  • Baptism into Christ
  • The Lord’s Supper
  • The gift of the Holy Spirit
  • The church as Christ’s body
  • A life of holiness, love, generosity, and care for the poor
  • Resurrection of the dead
  • Final judgment
  • God’s victory over death

This is not a vague lowest common denominator. Paul draws real boundaries. He rejects another gospel, idolatry, exploitation, lovelessness, and denial of the resurrection.

“If Christ has not been raised, your faith is empty and you are still in your sins.”

First Corinthians 15:17

At the same time, Paul refuses to let secondary disputes destroy fellowship.

“Welcome the one who is weak in faith, but not for the purpose of quarreling over opinions.”

Romans 14:1

He concludes:

“Welcome one another, just as Christ welcomed you, for the glory of God.”

Romans 15:7

The seven give the churches a floor beneath their differences. They tell us what must remain central and how Christians should treat one another when every question has not been settled.

Where these letters speak clearly, Christians should obey. Where they leave questions open, Christians should resist turning later conclusions into weapons against everyone who shares the apostolic center.

The traditions of Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant Christianity may preserve wisdom beyond what these seven letters state explicitly. But none of those traditions should hide the faith that existed before their divisions.

Paul’s question still confronts us:

“Has Christ been divided?”

First Corinthians 1:13

If Christ has not been divided, his people should not behave as though denominational identity is more fundamental than belonging to him.

What This Means for the Skeptic

The skeptic may reject the resurrection. The skeptic may believe Paul sincerely experienced something but misunderstood its cause. The skeptic may regard the gospel as an extraordinary religious interpretation of grief, visions, or psychological transformation.

But the skeptic cannot reasonably dismiss Christianity as a faith that took centuries to acquire its central beliefs.

By the 50s of the first century, and by approximately A.D. 48 if the early dating of Galatians is correct, the Christian movement already possessed its defining structure.

Christians were worshiping Israel’s God, confessing Jesus as Lord, proclaiming his crucifixion and resurrection, baptizing converts, celebrating the Lord’s Supper, claiming the Holy Spirit, caring for the poor, building communities across ethnic lines, and awaiting Christ’s return.

The divinity of Christ was not first invented at Nicaea. The resurrection was not first narrated by Christians living centuries after Jesus. Baptism and the Lord’s Supper were not medieval additions. Concern for the poor was not a modern political corruption of an originally private faith.

All of these are already present within Christianity’s earliest secure documents.

The skeptic therefore has something definite to evaluate. Christianity cannot be dismissed merely by attacking a later doctrine or pointing to a Gospel contradiction.

The central question remains whether God raised Jesus from the dead.

What This Means for the Christian Who Is Struggling

A Christian may lose confidence in a particular theory of biblical inspiration without losing Christ.

A Christian may discover tensions between the Gospels, questions about authorship, difficulties in the Old Testament, corruption in church history, or weaknesses in a denominational tradition.

Those discoveries can feel like walls collapsing. Sometimes they are only decorations falling away from a foundation that remains firm.

The seven letters provide a place to begin rebuilding.

The struggling Christian can still confess that God is one, Jesus is Lord, Christ died and was raised, salvation is grace, the Spirit is present, love is required, the poor must be remembered, the church is one body, and death will be defeated.

That is not an inferior form of Christianity. It is the apostolic center from which every fuller form of Christianity must grow.

Faith may undergo several conversions during a lifetime. A person may first receive Christianity from family, then experience Christ personally, then face questions that inherited answers can no longer carry.

The next conversion does not require abandoning the faith. It may require returning to its deepest center and discovering why it can still be trusted.

Conclusion: The Faith Remains

If the seven undisputed letters were all we had, we would lose much that Christians rightly treasure.

We would lose the faces, places, parables, and narrative detail supplied by the Gospels. We would lose the breadth of Israel’s Scriptures. We would lose the perspectives of other apostolic voices and the wisdom accumulated through centuries of Christian reflection.

But the Christian faith would remain.

We would still know whom we worship, what God has done in Christ, how salvation is received, how the church is formed, how Christians are called to live, and what hope waits beyond death.

The seven letters preserve Christianity in seed form. A seed is not the whole tree, but the life of the tree is already present within it.

The next question is whether the event at the center of that faith actually happened.

Paul says Jesus appeared to Cephas, James, the apostles, more than five hundred people, and finally to Paul himself. Paul later knew Cephas and James personally.

The Christian believes those experiences were encounters with the risen Jesus. The skeptic believes that at least some of them were sincere experiences produced by another cause.

The disagreement is no longer whether there is an early Christian faith to examine.

The disagreement is whether Jesus was really there.

The Common Ground: Why Christians and Skeptics Should Begin with Paul’s Seven Letters

/ Jason Conrad / Leave a comment

Imagine a Christian and a skeptic sitting down at the same table to discuss whether Jesus rose from the dead.

The Christian places the Bible on the table and says, “This is the Word of God.”

The skeptic immediately responds, “I do not believe that.”

The discussion has ended before the evidence has even been examined. The Christian is asking the skeptic to accept the authority of an entire collection of writings before considering the central event upon which that authority ultimately depends.

We do not need to begin that way.

The Christian and the skeptic do not have to agree about biblical inspiration, inerrancy, Gospel authorship, church tradition, or the Old Testament before beginning an investigation of the resurrection. There is a smaller collection of documents that almost every serious reconstruction of early Christianity must confront.

These are the seven letters of Paul commonly called “undisputed”:

  • Galatians
  • First Thessalonians
  • First Corinthians
  • Second Corinthians
  • Romans
  • Philippians
  • Philemon

The Christian believes these letters belong within inspired Scripture. The skeptic does not have to accept that conclusion. The skeptic only needs to examine whether these are genuine first-century letters associated with Paul and his missionary communities.

That gives us a place to begin together.

Common ground does not mean that we have reached a common conclusion. It means that we have agreed upon the evidence that any conclusion must explain.

Why These Seven Letters?

The New Testament contains thirteen letters bearing Paul’s name. Some scholars accept all thirteen as substantially Pauline. Others question several of them.

The seven undisputed letters are not necessarily the only letters Paul wrote. They are the letters accepted as authentically Pauline across the broadest range of historical scholarship.

Their approximate dates are:

  • Galatians, approximately A.D. 48
  • First Thessalonians, approximately A.D. 50-51
  • First Corinthians, approximately A.D. 53-55
  • Second Corinthians, approximately A.D. 55-56
  • Romans, approximately A.D. 56-57
  • Philippians, sometime during Paul’s imprisonment, probably in the 50s or early 60s
  • Philemon, also written during an imprisonment, probably in the 50s or early 60s

This series follows an early South Galatian chronology and dates Galatians to approximately A.D. 48. Many scholars place Galatians in the middle of the 50s. That disagreement affects the precise chronology, but not the larger conclusion. Galatians was written during Paul’s active missionary life and within the first generation after the death of Jesus.

Calling these letters “undisputed” does not mean that no one has ever challenged them. Some critics have denied that Paul wrote any of them. It also does not mean that every verse or the present arrangement of every letter is beyond question.

“Undisputed” means that these seven have become the durable critical foundation for reconstructing the historical Paul and the earliest Christian movement.

They are not seven independent witnesses. They come from the same broad Pauline missionary network, and several name co-senders such as Timothy, Silvanus, and Sosthenes. Romans even names Tertius as the person who physically wrote down the letter.

Nevertheless, they provide several different pieces of correspondence addressed to different communities, during different circumstances, over a period of years. Together they allow us to hear Paul’s voice, observe his relationships, follow developing conflicts, and identify traditions that existed before he wrote them down.

These Letters Were Not Protected from Criticism

The seven letters are not important because the church placed them in a glass case where historians were forbidden to touch them. They have spent more than a century and a half under sustained cross-examination.

In 1845, Ferdinand Christian Baur reduced the secure Pauline collection to four letters:

  • Galatians
  • First Corinthians
  • Second Corinthians
  • Romans

Baur called these the four principal letters because he believed they displayed Paul’s personality and historical circumstances so powerfully that their authenticity could not reasonably be denied.

He wrote:

“There has never been the slightest suspicion of inauthenticity cast upon these four letters. They bear the character of Pauline originality so unmistakably that there is no conceivable ground for raising critical doubts about them.”

Ferdinand Christian Baur, Paul, the Apostle of Jesus Christ, vol. 1, pp. 245-246, 1845

Baur was not trying to defend the traditional New Testament. He rejected or questioned most of the letters bearing Paul’s name. He even believed portions of Romans were added later.

Other critics, however, concluded that Baur had cut too deeply. By 1862, Adolf Hilgenfeld explicitly recognized the same seven-letter collection commonly accepted today:

“Besides those four unabridged principal letters, First Thessalonians and the letters to the Philippians and Philemon also have a well-founded claim to recognition as genuine.”

Adolf Hilgenfeld, “The Two Letters to the Thessalonians, According to Their Content and Origin,” Journal for Academic Theology 5, p. 226, 1862

The seven were therefore not created by church authorities trying to protect the Bible. They emerged as critics examined individual letters and concluded that the evidence justified expanding Baur’s four-letter core.

Then the criticism became even more radical.

Bruno Bauer, who should not be confused with Ferdinand Christian Baur, attempted to eliminate every authentic Pauline letter. Later critics known as the Dutch Radicals argued that the letters were second-century literary creations rather than genuine correspondence from Paul.

Willem Christiaan van Manen summarized their conclusion:

“With respect to the canonical Pauline Epistles, the later criticism under consideration has learned to recognise that they are none of them by Paul; neither fourteen, nor thirteen, nor nine or ten, nor seven or eight, nor yet even the four so long ‘universally’ regarded as unassailable.”

Willem Christiaan van Manen, “Paul,” Encyclopaedia Biblica, vol. 3, col. 3627, 1902

The movement of the debate is important.

Church tradition handed scholars thirteen letters bearing Paul’s name. Baur reduced the secure foundation to four. Other critics restored three, producing the seven. Radical critics then tried to reduce the collection to zero.

The attempt to reach zero did not persuade the wider field.

This does not prove the seven authentic by majority vote. It demonstrates that they are not a maximal Christian claim protected from investigation. They are the minimum historical collection that remained after prolonged criticism.

What Have Critics Tried to Explain Away?

The most serious challenges have generally taken four forms.

First, some critics have argued that the letters were created during the second century, perhaps around the time of Marcion.

Second, some have treated them as literary compositions written in Paul’s name rather than real correspondence.

Third, scholars have identified apparent contradictions, abrupt transitions, and possible later additions within the letters.

Fourth, statistical and computer analysis has been used to argue that the writing styles belong to different authors.

Each challenge has contributed something valuable. The letters are more complicated than an older view of Paul sitting alone and writing thirteen finished theological essays might suggest.

But exposing complexity is not the same as disproving authorship.

A successful alternative theory must do more than show that forgery, editing, or later collection was possible. It must explain the surviving evidence better than the conclusion that genuine correspondence from Paul lies behind these letters.

Possibility alone is not an explanation.

The Letters Appear Too Early to Be Second-Century Creations

The claim that Paul’s letters originated in the middle of the second century faces an early piece of evidence from Rome.

First Clement was written from the church of Rome to the church of Corinth. It is commonly dated around A.D. 95, although its exact date remains debated.

The author tells the Corinthians:

“Take up the letter of the blessed apostle Paul. What did he first write to you at the beginning of the gospel? Under the Spirit’s guidance, he wrote to you about himself, Cephas, and Apollos, because even then you had formed factions.”

First Clement 47.1-3, commonly dated c. A.D. 95

The writer is not merely using language that resembles Paul. He explicitly directs the Corinthians to consult an earlier letter from Paul and identifies the controversy recorded in First Corinthians:

“Each of you says, ‘I belong to Paul,’ ‘I belong to Apollos,’ ‘I belong to Cephas,’ or ‘I belong to Christ.’”

First Corinthians 1:12

If the common dating of First Clement is approximately correct, First Corinthians already existed near the end of the first century. It was associated with Paul, known in Rome, and expected to remain available in Corinth.

During the early second century, Polycarp wrote to Christians in Philippi:

“Neither I nor anyone like me can match the wisdom of the blessed and glorious Paul. When he was among you, in the presence of the people then living, he accurately and firmly taught the word of truth. When he was absent, he wrote letters to you. If you study them carefully, you will be able to build yourselves up in the faith given to you.”

Polycarp, Letter to the Philippians 3.2, early second century

Polycarp remembers Paul as a real teacher who had been physically present in Philippi. He also knows written communications associated with Paul. His use of the plural “letters” may indicate that more than one communication eventually contributed to the Philippian material we possess.

By approximately A.D. 140, Marcion possessed a collection of ten Pauline letters. That collection included all seven letters now considered undisputed.

Marcion’s collection has not survived, so it must be reconstructed from later writers who opposed him. While discussing Philemon, Tertullian wrote:

“Only this letter benefited from being so short: it escaped Marcion’s tampering. Yet since he accepted a letter written to one individual, I wonder why he rejected the two written to Timothy and the one to Titus concerning church order.”

Tertullian, Against Marcion 5.21.1, c. A.D. 207

Tertullian’s accusation that Marcion altered the letters is polemical and should not be treated as neutral history. His testimony nevertheless shows that Marcion’s collection included even the tiny and personal Letter to Philemon.

A substantial collection of recognizable Pauline letters therefore existed by approximately A.D. 140, and individual letters are attested earlier.

A theory placing their creation shortly before Marcion must explain how the letters were produced, collected, edited into different textual forms, distributed across widely separated communities, and accepted by opposing Christian movements within a very short period.

That is not impossible. It is simply less economical than the conclusion that genuine earlier correspondence had already been collected.

The Letters Fit the World of the First Christian Generation

The seven letters consistently inhabit the disputes of the middle of the first century.

Paul argues about circumcision, Jewish and Gentile table fellowship, the law of Moses, participation in Israel’s promises, and the collection of money for poor believers in Jerusalem. He knows leaders called Cephas, James, and John. Jerusalem remains an active center of the movement.

Paul writes:

“After three years, I went up to Jerusalem to become acquainted with Cephas and stayed with him for fifteen days. I saw none of the other apostles except James, the Lord’s brother.”

Galatians 1:18-19

The letters do not pause to introduce Cephas or James. Paul assumes that his readers understand why these people matter.

They also do not naturally address the controversies that became prominent during the middle of the second century. Paul does not discuss developed Gnostic systems, the aftermath of the Bar Kokhba revolt, or the increasingly formal debates over bishops and church offices.

Silence alone cannot prove a date. A later writer could create a story set in an earlier period. But the seven letters repeatedly fit the first-century Jewish and Gentile missionary world without needing to explain that world to their readers.

A second-century origin must therefore do more than suggest that a talented author could imitate the past. It must identify why that author constructed such an extensive network of first-generation disputes while showing comparatively little interest in the controversies of the period in which he was supposedly writing.

The Letters Behave Like Unfinished Correspondence

The seven letters are not smooth biographies of Paul or carefully ordered summaries of Christian doctrine.

They are filled with changing plans, forgotten details, unanswered questions, financial arrangements, personal disagreements, illnesses, requests, accusations, and attempts at reconciliation.

In First Corinthians, Paul begins thanking God that he baptized very few people in Corinth. Then he remembers another household and corrects himself:

“I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius, so no one can say that you were baptized in my name. I also baptized the household of Stephanas. Beyond that, I do not remember whether I baptized anyone else.”

First Corinthians 1:14-16

The correction does not advance Paul’s argument. It interrupts it. Paul appears to remember another baptism while dictating and adds it before continuing.

Second Corinthians contains defenses of travel plans Paul changed. Philippians discusses the illness and return of Epaphroditus. Philemon asks for a guest room to be prepared because Paul hopes to visit. Romans sends greetings to a long list of named people.

A literary author could invent such details. Fiction has always contained realistic names and circumstances. But the more incidental details a forgery contains, the more historical relationships the theory must invent and coordinate.

The undisputed letters contain not one isolated personal touch but an entire social world extending across Corinth, Galatia, Macedonia, Jerusalem, Ephesus, and Rome.

A later literary theory must explain that world at least as well as the straightforward conclusion that the letters arose from real relationships.

Complicated Transmission Does Not Eliminate Paul

The seven letters did not necessarily reach us in precisely the form in which they first left Paul’s hands.

First Corinthians refers to an earlier letter that has not survived:

“I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people.”

First Corinthians 5:9

Second Corinthians refers to another painful letter:

“I wrote to you out of great distress and anguish of heart, with many tears, not to cause you pain, but to let you know the abundant love I have for you.”

Second Corinthians 2:4

These references show that the New Testament preserves only part of Paul’s correspondence with Corinth. Some scholars believe Second Corinthians may combine portions of several authentic Pauline letters. Similar questions have been raised about Philippians and the ending of Romans.

Scholars also debate whether particular passages were added later. First Corinthians 14:34-35 and First Thessalonians 2:13-16 are among the most frequently discussed examples.

These questions matter, but they are questions about transmission and literary unity. They do not automatically prove that an anonymous second-century writer created the entire Pauline world.

If several genuine letters were later joined together, Paul has not disappeared. We may actually possess more fragments of his correspondence than the present number of canonical titles suggests.

A Christian does not need to fear this distinction. The resurrection evidence in First Corinthians 15 and Paul’s relationships with Cephas and James in Galatians do not depend upon every disputed passage being original or every canonical letter being a single untouched document.

Computer Analysis Did Not Produce a Replacement

During the 1960s, computer analysis was used to count Greek words, sentence lengths, and grammatical patterns within Paul’s letters. One famous study concluded that Paul wrote only five letters.

Later statistical studies produced substantially different results. One found no compelling stylistic reason to reject twelve of the thirteen letters bearing Paul’s name.

The problem is not that computers cannot recognize patterns. The problem is that the result changes according to which patterns are measured and which letters are assumed to be genuine at the beginning.

We possess no independently verified sample of Paul’s writing outside the collection. Paul also addressed different subjects, used co-senders, dictated to secretaries, and wrote over a period of years.

Computer analysis has helped scholars identify similarities and differences. It has not supplied an agreed mathematical solution that displaces the seven-letter foundation.

Why Scholarly Agreement Matters, and Why It Is Not Enough

Historical truth is not established by counting votes.

A letter would not become authentic merely because every professor in the world agreed about it. Scholars can inherit assumptions, follow trends, and make mistakes.

Nevertheless, a broad and durable consensus tells us where responsible investigation should begin, especially when that consensus includes scholars with sharply different religious commitments.

Bart Ehrman summarizes the present situation:

“Just about every, not quite every, New Testament scholar on the planet agrees that Paul wrote these seven.”

Bart D. Ehrman, “Pauline Forgeries: 2 Thessalonians as a Test Case,” 2014

The important words are “not quite every.” Exceptions remain, and their arguments should be heard.

But a skeptic cannot dismiss these documents merely by observing that ancient forgery existed or that later editing was possible. The skeptical explanation must account for the evidence at least as well as Pauline authorship does.

The seven are not called undisputed because they escaped criticism. They are called undisputed because, after more than 160 years of direct challenges, they remain the common working foundation.

What the Skeptic Should Concede

Accepting these letters as authentic does not require the skeptic to believe that Paul was inspired.

It does not require believing that Paul was always correct, that every experience he interpreted as divine actually came from God, or that Jesus rose from the dead.

It requires something more limited.

By the middle of the first century, there was a real missionary named Paul writing to real communities. Those communities already worshiped Jesus as Lord, practiced baptism and the Lord’s Supper, claimed experiences of the Holy Spirit, and proclaimed that God had raised Jesus from the dead.

Paul did not invent resurrection belief years later. He tells us that he had once opposed and persecuted the movement before joining it. He says he received an existing resurrection proclamation and later spent time with Cephas and James.

The skeptic may conclude that Paul and the earlier witnesses were mistaken about what they experienced. That explanation remains available.

What is no longer available is the casual claim that the resurrection arose as a legend generations later, after the original participants were gone. The seven letters place resurrection belief, named appearance traditions, and Paul’s contact with the Jerusalem leaders inside the earliest surviving Christian evidence.

The skeptic still has room to disagree. But the skeptic now has something definite to explain.

What the Christian Gains

The Christian does not need to prove everything before believing anything.

We do not need to settle the authorship of every Gospel, defend all thirteen letters attributed to Paul, solve every biblical contradiction, or establish a theory of inerrancy before examining the resurrection.

We can begin with the seven letters accepted across the widest range of scholarship.

Even if someone insisted upon retreating from seven letters to Baur’s original four, the heart of our resurrection evidence would remain untouched.

Galatians would remain. First Corinthians would remain.

Paul’s visit with Cephas and James would remain:

“I went up to Jerusalem to become acquainted with Cephas and stayed with him for fifteen days. I saw none of the other apostles except James, the Lord’s brother.”

Galatians 1:18-19

The resurrection tradition would remain:

“I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the Twelve.”

First Corinthians 15:3-5

Our investigation is not balanced upon the most disputed edge of the New Testament. It begins within the hardest documentary center.

That does not remove every mystery or answer every objection. It gives the Christian somewhere solid to stand while asking the questions.

Conclusion: The Evidence We Must Explain

The seven letters are not the verdict. They are the evidence admitted for examination.

They do not prove by themselves that Jesus rose from the dead. They establish that the resurrection proclamation arose early, that Paul received it rather than invented it, and that he personally entered the network of people named within that proclamation.

The Christian and the skeptic can therefore place these seven documents on the same table.

The Christian sees them as Scripture. The skeptic may see them only as historical correspondence. Either way, both must reckon with what they contain.

The next question is not yet whether the witnesses were right.

Before we evaluate their testimony, we should ask what kind of faith already existed inside these earliest documents.

If every Gospel, every disputed letter, and every later Christian writing disappeared, how much Christianity would remain within Paul’s seven undisputed letters?

More than many Christians or skeptics realize.

Return to the Resurrection

/ Jason Conrad / Leave a comment

The Foundation Beneath Christian Faith, Unanswered Questions, and Every Argument About God

Christianity does not stand because Christians have won every argument.

It does not stand because we have discovered a philosophical proof of God that no atheist can answer. It does not stand because Christians can explain every instance of suffering, resolve every biblical difficulty, defend every event in church history, or reproduce every spiritual experience that first brought us into the faith.

Christianity stands or falls upon one central claim:

God raised Jesus from the dead.

Paul states the matter without qualification:

“If the Messiah has not been raised, then our proclamation is empty, and your faith is empty. We are even exposed as false witnesses about God because we testified that God raised the Messiah. If the Messiah has not been raised, your faith is futile, and you are still in your sins.”

Paul, First Letter to the Corinthians 15.14 to 15.17, c. A.D. 54 to 55.

Paul does not say that Christian faith becomes empty if the fine-tuning argument fails.

He does not say that faith becomes empty if Christians cannot explain why God permits suffering.

He does not say that faith becomes empty if our original religious experience fades, if the Bible becomes more complicated than we were taught, or if a Christian institution fails us.

He says that if Christ has not been raised, Christian proclamation is empty and Christian faith is futile.

That is the foundation to which every Christian question must eventually return.

This post will not attempt to prove that Jesus rose from the dead. That investigation will require several future posts. The purpose here is more basic. Before we examine the evidence, we need to understand why the resurrection is the central question.

If Jesus was not raised, no other argument can save Christianity.

If Jesus was raised, then no other unanswered question can simply be permitted to make the resurrection disappear.

Every Christian Enters Through a Door

Every Christian enters the faith through a door.

For some, the door is experience. Christ becomes real during a worship service, at a Christian camp, in recovery, through answered prayer, or during a season of suffering. Something happens that the person interprets as an encounter with Christ, and that experience changes the direction of life.

That is part of my own story. When I was eighteen years old, I had an experience at a Christian camp that moved me toward Christianity. I did not begin with a historical investigation of the resurrection or a philosophical argument for God. I began with something that happened to me and with the conviction that Christ was somehow present within it.

For others, the door is inheritance. Christianity is received through parents, grandparents, a congregation, and a community in which prayer, Scripture, and worship are already part of life. There may never be one radical emotional conversion. Christianity is simply the faith in which the person learned to live.

That is closer to my wife’s story. She grew up in a Christian home without the kind of dramatic emotional conversion that I experienced. She did not suddenly move from atheism to Christianity. Christian faith was given to her through her family and reinforced by the community surrounding her.

Both doors can lead someone authentically into faith. Neither should be despised.

A religious experience can be an authentic encounter through which someone is brought to Christ. Growing up within a Christian family can also be an authentic work of grace. A person does not need a dramatic conversion story for inherited Christianity to be real.

But the door through which we entered the Christian life is not necessarily the foundation upon which our faith must eventually stand.

Experiences fade. Cultures change. Families disappoint us. Churches fail. Questions arrive that nobody prepared us to answer.

Eventually, every house is tested by weather.

When that happens, the Christian does not merely need another emotional experience or a stronger attachment to the culture that first provided faith. The Christian needs to know what lies beneath the house.

Beneath our experience, inheritance, theology, and tradition lies the original Christian claim:

God raised Jesus from the dead.

The Christian Life Contains More Than One Conversion

We often speak about conversion as though it were one event. A person was once outside Christianity, experienced conversion, and then remained essentially unchanged except for gradually learning more about the faith.

The lives of Christians are usually more complicated.

There may be a conversion of belonging, when Christianity is received through family and community. There may be a conversion of experience, when Christ becomes personally real. There may later be a conversion of the mind, when inherited or experienced faith must become examined faith. There may also be a conversion of the will, when what someone believes begins to reorder ambition, money, sexuality, relationships, vocation, and the use of power.

These conversions do not always occur in the same order. They may overlap, and some may need to happen repeatedly. A Christian may experience new conversions through suffering, repentance, intellectual crisis, moral failure, unexpected vocation, or the recognition that an earlier understanding of faith can no longer carry the weight being placed upon it.

The later conversion does not necessarily prove that the earlier one was false. Each may be authentic while preparing the Christian for something deeper.

The life of Basil of Caesarea offers a striking ancient example.

Basil Awakened Within the Faith He Had Inherited

Basil was not raised outside Christianity. He grew up in one of the most remarkable Christian families of the fourth century. His grandmother, Macrina the Elder, had endured persecution. His parents were Christians. His sister Macrina and his brother Gregory of Nyssa would eventually be remembered as saints.

Christianity belonged to Basil’s family, history, and identity.

Basil then received an elite education. He studied rhetoric and classical literature and prepared himself for a successful public career. When he returned home, he had not necessarily renounced Christianity, but Christianity had not yet reordered the direction of his life.

Gregory of Nyssa describes his brother’s condition with the frankness that can sometimes exist only within a family:

“Basil returned after his long education, already trained in rhetoric. He was puffed up beyond measure with pride in his speaking ability, and he looked down on the local dignitaries as though he were superior to the leading men of the province.”

Gregory of Nyssa, Life of Macrina, c. A.D. 380 to 383.

Basil possessed Christian inheritance, education, ability, and ambition. Gregory does not say that Basil had become an atheist. He says that Basil had become impressed with himself.

Then Macrina confronted the direction of his life:

“Macrina took him in hand, and with remarkable speed she drew him toward the goal of philosophy. He abandoned worldly glory, rejected the reputation gained through public speaking, and chose the demanding life of discipline.”

Gregory of Nyssa, Life of Macrina, c. A.D. 380 to 383.

By “philosophy,” Gregory means the disciplined Christian life. Basil turned away from the pursuit of status and toward prayer, Scripture, renunciation, charity, manual labor, and service.

Basil later described this period as an awakening:

“I had spent a great deal of time pursuing empty things and had wasted nearly all my youth acquiring the wisdom that God has made foolish. Then, like someone awakened from a deep sleep, I turned my eyes toward the wonderful light of the truth of the Gospel. I recognized the uselessness of the wisdom of the rulers of this age, who are passing away. I wept many tears over my miserable life and prayed that I might be given guidance into the teachings of true religion.”

Basil of Caesarea, Letter 223.2, c. A.D. 375.

Basil does not describe himself as hearing about Christianity for the first time. He describes himself as awakening to the truth of the Gospel that had surrounded him throughout his upbringing.

His Christian childhood was not necessarily fraudulent. It gave him the Scriptures, language, examples, and relationships through which his later awakening became possible. Nevertheless, the Christianity he inherited could not remain merely an inherited identity. It had to become a reorientation of his own life.

Basil had entered through the door of Christian inheritance. Macrina helped him discover that entering the house was not the end of conversion.

He needed another conversion.

The same may be true for Christians whose inherited or experienced faith is now being challenged. The questions do not necessarily mean that the first conversion was false. They may be inviting us into another conversion, one in which our faith is no longer supported primarily by culture or emotion but is driven downward toward its foundation.

That foundation is the resurrection.

Suppose the Atheist Has the Better Argument

Christians sometimes act as though faith depends upon winning every philosophical argument for the existence of God.

It does not.

Suppose, for the sake of argument, that the atheist has the stronger case against the cosmological argument. Suppose the atheist offers a more convincing account of morality, consciousness, evolution, or the apparent order of the universe. Suppose the Christian cannot answer every objection.

Would that establish that Jesus remained dead?

It would not.

It might weaken one philosophical route toward belief in God. It might expose weaknesses in a popular form of Christian apologetics. It might force Christians to abandon arguments they once found persuasive.

It would not tell us what happened after Jesus was crucified.

Consider fine-tuning.

The Christian looks at the conditions that permit life and sees the careful work of a designer. The atheist looks at the same universe and sees something very different: a vast, cold, and overwhelmingly lifeless expanse in which almost everything is hostile to life.

From that perspective, the universe does not resemble a piece of fine art carefully arranged for us. It looks like the result of impersonal physical laws, enormous stretches of time, and chance. Life emerged in one tiny corner because, given enough time and opportunity, it eventually could.

The same universe is therefore used to support opposite conclusions. The Christian points to the narrow conditions that permit life and says, “This looks designed.” The atheist points to the universe’s vast lifelessness and says, “This looks random.”

Perhaps the atheist interpretation makes more sense to someone. Perhaps the Christian cannot supply a convincing response.

The historical question still remains:

Did God raise Jesus from the dead?

If God raised Jesus, then God’s existence is no longer merely something inferred from the appearance of the universe. God has acted in history.

The resurrection does not require us to look at the stars and work our way upward through an uncertain chain of reasoning toward an unidentified creator. It claims that God has acted within human history and identified Jesus by raising him from the dead.

This does not mean that Christianity has no place for reason or evidence. Investigating the resurrection will require careful reasoning. We will need to compare sources, weigh testimony, consider alternative explanations, acknowledge limitations, and resist the temptation to claim more than the evidence allows.

We are not abandoning reason. We are refusing to make Christianity depend upon winning an argument that does not lead us to Jesus.

An atheist may win an argument about fine-tuning without proving that Jesus remained dead.

A Christian may lose an argument without losing Christ.

Return to the resurrection.

Suppose We Cannot Answer the Problem of Suffering

For many Christians, the greatest challenge is not a manuscript variant, a scientific discovery, or an argument about the origin of the universe.

It is suffering.

The problem of suffering is not a gentle rain against the windows. For many people, it is the storm that shakes the entire house.

Why did the child die?

Why was the prayer unanswered?

Why did God allow the abuse?

Why did the faithful person develop cancer while the cruel person continued to prosper?

Why do earthquakes, diseases, wars, famine, and apparently meaningless tragedies destroy people who did nothing to deserve them?

Christians have proposed many answers. Some emphasize human freedom. Some emphasize the regularity of the natural world. Some argue that suffering can form character or produce goods that would otherwise be impossible. Some appeal to humanity’s alienation from God, the limits of human understanding, or the promise that God will finally restore creation.

These answers may help in particular situations, but none of them explains every instance of suffering. Some suffering appears so severe and unnecessary that attempts to explain it can sound less like compassion and more like an effort to protect a theological system.

A Christian should be able to say, “I do not know why this happened.”

Bart Ehrman has repeatedly explained that he did not leave Christianity because his biblical scholarship made Christian faith impossible. He remained a Christian for years after abandoning his earlier belief in biblical inerrancy. He says that the decisive issue was suffering:

“The problem of suffering became for me the problem of faith.”

Bart D. Ehrman, “Human Suffering and the Christian Faith,” December 6, 2020.

Ehrman did not reach that conclusion casually. He describes years of struggle and dissatisfaction with both simple and sophisticated Christian explanations. His testimony deserves to be heard rather than dismissed.

It also brings us to the precise question facing the Christian who is struggling to remain in the faith:

Does my inability to explain suffering give me sufficient reason to conclude that God did not raise Jesus from the dead?

The existence of suffering is evidence that Christians must take seriously. It creates an enormous challenge to belief in a good and powerful God.

But an unanswered question is not automatically a refutation.

“I cannot explain why this happened” is not the same conclusion as “Jesus was not raised.”

If the resurrection testimony is credible, then suffering and resurrection must both be weighed. We cannot allow suffering to make the resurrection disappear any more than we should use the resurrection to make suffering appear unimportant.

The resurrection does not explain why every tragedy occurs. It identifies God with the man who was betrayed, abandoned, tortured, humiliated, and executed. Christianity does not present God as explaining suffering from a safe distance. It claims that God entered human suffering in Christ.

The resurrection then declares that suffering and death do not receive the final word.

This may not tell us why a particular child died, why a prayer was unanswered, or why a terrible event was permitted. It gives Christians a reason to believe that what appears final to us is not final to God.

Paul did not write about resurrection from a life protected against suffering:

“We are afflicted in every way, but not crushed; perplexed, but not driven to despair; persecuted, but not abandoned; struck down, but not destroyed. We always carry the death of Jesus in our bodies so that the life of Jesus may also be revealed in our bodies.”

Paul, Second Letter to the Corinthians 4.8 to 4.10, c. A.D. 54 to 56.

Paul says that he was perplexed.

Christian faith did not mean that he understood everything happening to him. He experienced affliction, persecution, and circumstances that left him without clear answers.

But perplexity did not have to become despair.

Paul interpreted his suffering through the death and resurrection of Jesus. He did not claim to know why every painful event occurred. He believed that the God who raised Jesus could bring life through circumstances that appeared to contain only death.

The Christian confession does not have to be, “I understand everything God permits.”

It can be:

“I do not understand this. I may never understand it. But I have good reason to believe that God raised Jesus from the dead. Therefore, I will continue to follow the crucified and risen Christ while I carry my unanswered questions with me.”

We may remain perplexed without being driven to despair.

Return to the resurrection.

Suppose the Bible Is More Complicated Than We Were Taught

Some Christians were taught that their faith depends upon the Bible being free from every historical difficulty, tension, textual variant, or disagreement among its authors.

When they discover that the Bible is more complicated, they fear that Christianity must collapse with their earlier theory of Scripture.

But the Bible cannot be the first assumption in an investigation of Christianity.

Why should these particular books be regarded as Scripture? Who wrote them? How were they transmitted? How was the canon formed? What should Christians do with differences among manuscripts, tensions between accounts, or centuries of disagreement over interpretation?

These questions matter. They do not make the Bible worthless or spiritually irrelevant. They mean that Christians should not be required to settle every question about inspiration, inerrancy, authorship, transmission, and canon before examining the foundation of Christianity.

We can begin more modestly. We can examine the earliest Christian writings as ancient historical documents before reaching conclusions about their inspiration.

We do not initially have to say, “Paul must be correct because his letters are in the Bible.” We can begin by asking what Paul’s authentic letters tell us about the movement in which he participated and the message he says he received.

A Christian may conclude that a biblical author shaped a narrative, that manuscripts contain variants, or that two accounts are difficult to reconcile. Those conclusions do not establish that Jesus remained dead.

A theory about the Bible can be challenged without the resurrection being disproved.

The collapse of one answer is not necessarily the collapse of the foundation.

Return to the resurrection.

Suppose the Church Fails Us

The church has preserved Scripture, developed theology, worshiped across centuries, cared for the suffering, built institutions, and carried the Christian message throughout the world.

The church has also experienced division, corruption, political manipulation, abuse, and moral failure.

If a congregation fails us, that failure can be devastating. If a Christian leader abuses power, the damage can last for decades. If an institution protects itself rather than the vulnerable, Christians should not excuse the injustice in order to protect the institution.

But the failure of people who claim to follow Jesus is not evidence that Jesus remained dead.

The church cannot be the earliest foundation because the church itself is something that must be explained.

Before there were councils, creeds, denominations, cathedrals, monasteries, seminaries, or a completed New Testament, there was a movement proclaiming that Jesus had been raised from the dead.

The church did not exist first and then invent the resurrection as a doctrine to support itself. The proclamation of the resurrection produced the movement that became the church.

A church failure may force us to reconsider what Christian faithfulness should look like. It may force us to leave a particular congregation, reject corrupt leadership, or admit that Christians have acted in ways completely opposed to Christ.

It does not tell us what happened after Jesus was crucified.

Return to the resurrection.

Where the Investigation Can Begin

If we do not begin by assuming that Christians have won every philosophical argument, solved the problem of suffering, resolved every biblical difficulty, or defended every Christian institution, where can we begin?

We can begin with the seven letters of Paul that scholars across the religious spectrum broadly accept as authentic: Romans, First and Second Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, First Thessalonians, and Philemon.

Bart Ehrman is an atheist and agnostic New Testament scholar who does not believe that God bodily raised Jesus from the dead. He nevertheless describes the consensus concerning these letters:

“Just about every New Testament scholar on the planet agrees that Paul wrote these seven.”

Bart D. Ehrman, “Pauline Forgeries: 2 Thessalonians as a Test Case,” December 16, 2014.

“Undisputed” does not mean that no person anywhere has ever questioned their authenticity. It means that these seven letters provide the broadest shared documentary foundation for examining the earliest Christian movement.

This does not require us to begin by declaring that Paul was inerrant. It does not require us to accept the traditional authorship of every biblical book or resolve every question about the canon.

We can first ask what these letters establish as historical documents written by a participant in the earliest Christian movement.

That investigation brings us directly to the resurrection.

What Paul Says Was of First Importance

Paul wrote First Corinthians around A.D. 54 to 55. He reminded the Corinthian church of a proclamation he had already delivered when he first established the community:

“I handed on to you, as of first importance, what I also received: that the Messiah died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the Twelve. After that, he appeared to more than five hundred brothers and sisters at one time. Most of them are still alive, though some have died. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. Last of all, as to one born at the wrong time, he appeared also to me.”

Paul, First Letter to the Corinthians 15.3 to 15.8, c. A.D. 54 to 55.

This passage does not yet prove that Jesus rose from the dead.

Later posts will need to investigate what Paul means, how early the tradition is, what kind of appearances were claimed, how Paul’s experience relates to the other appearances, and whether alternative explanations can account for the evidence.

For now, Paul establishes why the resurrection must be investigated first.

He calls this proclamation a matter “of first importance.” He also says that he received it and then handed it on. The message therefore existed before Paul wrote First Corinthians and before he first preached in Corinth.

The resurrection was not a late doctrine created after the church had already developed. It belonged to the proclamation through which the earliest churches came into existence.

That does not tell us whether the proclamation was true.

It tells us that this is the claim upon which the movement was built.

Paul Makes the Faith Stand or Fall Here

Paul tells the Corinthians what would remain of Christianity if Jesus had not been raised:

“If the Messiah has not been raised, then our proclamation is empty, and your faith is empty. We are even exposed as false witnesses about God because we testified that God raised the Messiah. If the Messiah has not been raised, your faith is futile, and you are still in your sins.”

Paul, First Letter to the Corinthians 15.14 to 15.17, c. A.D. 54 to 55.

Paul does not say that Christian faith becomes empty if the fine-tuning argument fails.

He does not say that faith becomes empty if Christians cannot resolve every difficulty in the Bible.

He does not say that faith becomes empty when an emotional experience fades, when Christian culture changes, or when a church fails.

He does not say that faith becomes empty because Christians cannot explain every instance of suffering.

He says that if Christ has not been raised, Christian proclamation is empty and Christian faith is futile.

Paul does not retreat into symbolism. He does not argue that the resurrection remains spiritually true as long as Christians find inspiration in it. He says that if God did not raise Jesus, then the witnesses have misrepresented God and the entire proclamation has lost its foundation.

Christianity does not stand because Christians have won every argument.

Christianity stands if Christ is risen.

An Atheist Historian Recognizes the Turning Point

Ehrman does not accept Paul’s conclusion that God raised Jesus. He distinguishes between the resurrection itself and belief in the resurrection.

Nevertheless, he recognizes what made Jesus different from other Jewish preachers executed by political power:

“Belief in Jesus’ resurrection changed absolutely everything.”

Bart D. Ehrman, How Jesus Became God, 2014, p. 131.

Paul and Ehrman disagree about the cause.

Paul says that resurrection belief arose because God raised Jesus and Jesus appeared to people.

Ehrman argues that followers of Jesus had experiences they interpreted as appearances of the risen Jesus.

But they agree about the historical structure. Without belief in the resurrection, there is no Christianity to explain.

If Jesus had been crucified and his followers had simply returned home, he might have been remembered as another Jewish teacher executed by Rome. The movement continued because his followers became convinced that the crucifixion was not God’s rejection of Jesus. They believed that God had reversed Rome’s judgment by raising him from the dead.

That does not prove they were correct.

It identifies the claim that must be examined.

The Resurrection Is Not a Last Resort

When I say that Christians must return to the resurrection, I do not mean that the resurrection is an emergency exit we use after losing every other argument.

The resurrection is not our last resort.

It is our first question.

Christianity did not begin with fine-tuning and eventually arrive at Jesus. It began with people proclaiming that the man Rome had crucified was alive.

Christianity did not begin with a completed Bible and then derive the resurrection from its pages. The resurrection proclamation existed before the New Testament was assembled.

Christianity did not begin with a powerful church enforcing belief in the resurrection. The church came into existence because people believed the resurrection had occurred.

The resurrection is not where Christians retreat when everything else fails. It is the foundation from which every other Christian conviction must be examined.

If the atheist has the stronger philosophical argument, return to the resurrection.

If suffering remains unexplained, return to the resurrection.

If the Bible becomes more complicated, return to the resurrection.

If the church disappoints or betrays us, return to the resurrection.

Not because the resurrection makes those problems disappear. It does not.

We return because none of those problems can answer the resurrection question for us.

Did God raise Jesus from the dead?

The Next Conversion of Christian Faith

My experience at eighteen may explain how I entered Christianity. I do not need to reject that experience or pretend that it was false. But the truth of Christianity cannot depend upon my ability to reproduce an emotion from years ago.

A Christian upbringing may explain how someone inherited the faith. That inheritance should not be despised. It may have provided Scripture, prayer, moral formation, and a community of love. But Christianity cannot be true merely because sincere parents taught it to their children.

The weakening of an earlier understanding does not necessarily mean that faith is ending. It may mean that another conversion is beginning.

The next conversion may be the movement from inherited faith or experienced faith into examined faith.

This does not require us to manufacture another religious experience. It does not require us to retreat into a Christian culture that no longer provides certainty. It does not require us to suppress difficult questions or pretend that weak answers are convincing.

It requires us to examine the claim from which Christianity arose.

If the resurrection testimony is not credible, then Christians should know that. Paul himself gives us permission to reach the conclusion that Christian faith is empty if Christ was not raised.

But if the resurrection testimony is credible, then Christians have a foundation strong enough to carry questions that remain unanswered.

We can worship Christ without understanding every mystery.

We can follow him while remaining perplexed.

We can reject shallow answers to suffering without rejecting the God who entered suffering and raised Jesus from the dead.

We can acknowledge the failures of Christians without concluding that Christ has failed.

We can admit that we lost an argument without concluding that Jesus remained dead.

The next conversion is not from questioning back into unquestioning certainty. It is from a faith that depends upon having every answer into a faith that knows the foundation upon which it stands.

Conclusion

The door through which you entered Christianity may no longer be able to carry the full weight of your faith. That does not mean you never entered. It may mean that you are being invited to discover what has been beneath you all along.

Your experience mattered. Your inheritance mattered. The questions now troubling you also matter. But none of them is the foundation. The foundation is the claim that a crucified man did not remain dead.

An atheist may offer a better explanation of the vast and lifeless universe than the Christian arguments you have heard.

Return to the resurrection.

You may be unable to explain why God permitted the suffering that has shaken your life.

Return to the resurrection.

The Bible may be more complicated than you were taught, and the history of the church may be more confused and painful than you expected.

Return to the resurrection.

Not because returning to the resurrection makes the universe appear less cold, explains every tragedy, resolves every biblical difficulty, or excuses the failures of the church.

Return because Christianity stands or falls there.

The resurrection is not an answer sheet that makes every other question disappear. It is the foundation from which Christians can continue asking those questions without believing that uncertainty requires abandonment. Christianity does not ask us to pretend that we possess explanations we do not have. It asks whether we have sufficient reason to trust the one whom God raised.

If God did not raise Jesus, Paul tells us that Christian proclamation is empty and Christian faith is futile.

If God raised Jesus, then the house can remain standing even while some rooms are dark, some windows are broken, and the storm outside has not yet passed.

We may remain perplexed without being driven to despair. We may worship without understanding everything. We may carry unanswered questions while continuing to follow the crucified and risen Christ.

Christianity does not stand because Christians have won every argument. Christianity stands if Christ is risen.

Did God raise Jesus from the dead?

That is where Christianity began. That is where our investigation must begin. For Christians whose first conversion can no longer carry all their questions, that is where another conversion can begin.