historical-jesus

Christianity’s Unstoppable Growth in the First 300 Years

/ Jason Conrad / Leave a comment

When people think of the first centuries of the Roman Empire, they imagine a crowded religious marketplace: temples to Jupiter, processions for Isis, secret gatherings of Mithraists, ecstatic festivals for Cybele. Against this backdrop, Christianity sometimes gets cast as “just another mystery religion.” But the evidence — both Christian and pagan — tells a different story.

Christianity grew in ways no other religion did. And it grew because it was different.

A Movement That Could Not Be Ignored

By the year AD 112, the Roman governor Pliny the Younger wrote to Emperor Trajan about the rapid spread of Christianity in his province of Bithynia-Pontus:

“For many persons of every age, every rank, and also of both sexes are and will be endangered. For the contagion of this superstition has spread not only through the cities but also through the villages and the countryside.”
— Pliny, Letters 10.96 (Loeb Classical Library), written c. AD 112

Pliny’s words confirm what the New Testament had already claimed: Christianity wasn’t staying local. It had spread across cities, villages, farms, households, men and women, slave and free. This was no longer a tiny sect in Jerusalem — it was a movement Rome could not ignore.

Growth by the Numbers

Sociologist Rodney Stark, in The Rise of Christianity (1996), famously calculated that Christianity expanded at about 40% per decade — slow and steady exponential growth. Bart Ehrman, in The Triumph of Christianity (2018), adopts a similar model for illustration.

  • 30 AD: a few dozen disciples in Jerusalem
  • 100 AD: ~7,000–10,000
  • 200 AD: ~200,000–300,000
  • 300 AD: ~4–6 million
  • 350 AD: ~30 million (roughly half the empire)

No other religion in antiquity shows a comparable curve.

Why Was Christianity Different?

1. Exclusivity

Roman religion was inclusive. You could worship Mithras in the army, Isis at home, and Jupiter in the forum. Christianity, by contrast, insisted that all other gods were false. Converts had to abandon sacrifices and festivals. Romans accused them of being “atheists” for rejecting the gods of the empire.

Judaism shared that exclusivity, but it was ethnic and national. Christianity took it further: one God for all nations.

Justin Martyr, writing in the mid-2nd century (c. AD 155), put it this way:

“We do not sacrifice to idols, for we know they are not gods but lifeless and dead. We do not worship with the multitude, but we direct prayers to the only true God.”
— Justin, First Apology 9 (Loeb/ANF)

Later in the 2nd century, Tertullian sharpened the same point in legal and political terms. Accused of disloyalty to the emperor, he replied:

“We Christians are accused of being irreligious with regard to the emperors. But let it be said: we do not worship the emperor, we will not swear by the genius of Caesar. We worship him lawfully, as a man, and pray for him. But as for the gods, we know that they are no gods.”
— Tertullian, Apology 24 (written c. AD 197, Loeb/ANF)

That phrase — “we worship him lawfully, as a man” — is carefully chosen. Christians would:

  • Honor the emperor in his human role (by paying taxes, obeying laws, and praying for him).
  • But they would not cross into idolatry by offering sacrifices or calling him divine.

This was the flashpoint of exclusivity. Christians were loyal citizens in every human way — but their refusal to honor the gods (and Caesar’s genius) made them appear dangerous, even atheistic, to Roman society.

2. Universality

Other cults were tied to particular groups: Mithraism to soldiers, Isis to Egyptian traditions, Cybele to Asia Minor. Christianity declared itself for everyone.

Paul put it in striking terms:

“There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.”
— Paul, Letter to the Galatians 3:28 (written c. AD 50s, Loeb/NRSV)

Nearly a century later, Justin Martyr could make the same claim even more boldly:

“There is no people, whether Greek or barbarian, or any race whatsoever, among whom prayers and thanksgivings are not offered through the name of the crucified Jesus.”
— Justin, First Apology 46 (written c. AD 155, Loeb/ANF)

From Paul to Justin, the message is consistent: Christianity was not a local or ethnic faith. It was a movement that claimed universality — open to all nations, classes, and peoples.

3. Community and Care

This is where Christianity truly stood apart. Roman society had structures of family, guilds, and even associations — but none looked like the Christian ethic of charity.

  • Roman families (familia) cared for their own household, but responsibility rarely extended beyond kin and slaves.
  • Guilds and burial clubs (collegia) sometimes pooled resources for funerals, but their reach was limited and local.
  • Philosophical schools (Stoics, Epicureans, Platonists) spoke of virtue and brotherhood in theory, but offered no system of daily material support to the poor.
  • Mystery cults like Isis or Mithras provided rituals and camaraderie, but not hospitals or famine relief.

Christianity was different. Caring for widows, orphans, the poor, the sick, and even strangers was commanded as part of the “way of life” (Didache 1–4, c. AD 80–100).

During the plague of the 260s, Dionysius of Alexandria described the difference Christians made:

“Most of our brethren, in their exceeding love and brotherly kindness, did not spare themselves, but kept by each other, and visited the sick without thought of danger, and ministered to them assiduously, and treated them for their healing in Christ, and with them departed this life serenely happy; for they were infected by others with the disease, drawing upon themselves the sickness of their neighbors, and willingly taking over their pains.”
— Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 7.22 (Loeb Classical Library, written c. AD 310–325, quoting Dionysius’s letter from c. AD 260)

Even pagan critics noticed. Lucian of Samosata, a satirist writing around AD 170, mocked Christians for their enduring practice of brotherhood:

“The poor wretches have convinced themselves, first and foremost, that they are going to be immortal and live for all time… and then it was impressed on them by their original lawgiver that they are all brothers from the moment they are converted, and deny the gods of Greece, and worship that crucified sophist himself, and live under his laws. So they despise all things indiscriminately and consider them common property.”
— Lucian, The Passing of Peregrinus 13 (Loeb Classical Library, written c. AD 170)

And this care extended to the most vulnerable: children. In Roman society, it was common to expose unwanted infants — especially girls — leaving them to die or be taken as slaves. Philosophers like Aristotle endorsed the practice. But Christians condemned it as murder and became known for rescuing and raising exposed infants.

The Epistle of Barnabas (c. AD 130) instructed believers:

“You shall not kill a child by abortion, nor shall you destroy it after birth.”
— Barnabas 19.5 (Loeb, Apostolic Fathers)

This was radical. Christians didn’t only nurse plague victims — they took in abandoned babies, treating them as precious image-bearers of God.

And later, even Rome’s own emperor admitted it. Julian the Apostate (who tried to revive paganism after Constantine) begrudgingly confessed:

“Why do we not observe how it is their benevolence to strangers, their care for the graves of the dead, and the pretended holiness of their lives that have done most to increase atheism [i.e., Christianity]?”
— Julian, Letter to Arsacius (Loeb Classical Library, written c. AD 362)

Julian even instructed pagan priests to imitate Christian charity — because he knew it was winning hearts.

So while families cared only for their own, guilds helped only with burials, and philosophers offered only ideals, Christians made charity the center of their identity. This ethic reshaped communities across the empire.

4. Moral Demands

Pagan cults emphasized ritual. Christianity demanded a transformed life.

Pliny himself noted that Christians bound themselves by oath:

“They asserted, however, that the sum and substance of their fault or error had been that they were accustomed to meet on a fixed day before dawn and sing responsively a hymn to Christ as to a god, and to bind themselves by oath, not to some crime, but not to commit fraud, theft, or adultery, not to falsify their trust, nor to refuse to return a trust when called upon to do so.”
— Pliny, Letters 10.96 (Loeb Classical Library, written c. AD 112)

For Christians, morality wasn’t optional — it was central.

And Christian writers pointed to transformed lives as the greatest proof of all. Origen, writing in the mid-3rd century, argued:

“Their reform of life is the strongest testimony that they have come upon a truth that cannot be shaken. For who that sees the untold multitudes who have abandoned their former vices, and given themselves to a pure and sober life, does not wonder at the power that has wrought this change?”
— Origen, Against Celsus 1.67 (written c. AD 248, Loeb)

For Origen, the very existence of morally changed communities was itself evidence that Christianity was real and divine.

5. A Historical Resurrection

Skeptics sometimes argue that the resurrection of Jesus was just another version of the “dying and rising god” myths in the ancient world. But when we examine the actual stories, each one is different in crucial ways — especially when it comes to dates and eyewitnesses.

Osiris (Egyptian):

  • Date: 2nd millennium BC; Plutarch, On Isis and Osiris (c. AD 100).
  • Story: Murdered, dismembered, reassembled, becomes ruler of the underworld.
  • Eyewitnesses: None.
  • Difference: Never returns bodily to life among mortals.

Dionysus (Greek):

  • Date: 6th c. BC (Homeric Hymns); 4th c. BC (Orphic).
  • Story: Torn apart, restored; fertility cycles.
  • Eyewitnesses: None.
  • Difference: Cyclical vegetation rebirth, not historical resurrection.

Attis (Phrygian):

  • Date: 4th–3rd c. BC cult; Roman references 1st c. BC–4th c. AD.
  • Story: Castrates himself, dies under a tree; later myths say preserved from decay.
  • Eyewitnesses: None.
  • Difference: Mourning cult, not resurrection.

Adonis (Greek/Near Eastern):

  • Date: 7th–6th c. BC cult; Ovid Metamorphoses (AD 8); Lucian (AD 150).
  • Story: Killed by boar; blood gives flowers; seasonal return.
  • Eyewitnesses: None.
  • Difference: Fertility myth.

Inanna/Ishtar (Mesopotamian):

  • Date: Descent of Inanna (c. 1750 BC); Descent of Ishtar (7th c. BC).
  • Story: Dies in the underworld, restored by gods.
  • Eyewitnesses: None.
  • Difference: Cosmic myth, not history.

Romulus (Roman):

  • Date: Legendary founder, 8th c. BC; Livy, History of Rome 1.16 (27–9 BC); Plutarch, Life of Romulus (c. AD 100).
  • Story: Competing endings — (1) vanishes in a storm; (2) Proculus Julius claims vision; (3) Senators murdered him and invented tale.
  • Eyewitnesses: One vision, contradictory stories.
  • Difference: Apotheosis (becoming divine), not bodily resurrection.

Heracles (Greek):

  • Date: Homer (8th c. BC); Apollodorus (1st–2nd c. AD).
  • Story: Dies on pyre; mortal part destroyed, divine part ascends.
  • Eyewitnesses: None.
  • Difference: Apotheosis, not resurrection.

Zalmoxis (Thracian):

  • Date: Herodotus, Histories 4.94–96 (c. 440 BC).
  • Story: Hides underground for three years, reappears.
  • Eyewitnesses: Followers saw him reemerge, but he never died.
  • Difference: Retreat-and-return, not resurrection.

Melqart (Phoenician):

  • Date: Cult at Tyre, 9th c. BC; Greek accounts 5th c. BC onward.
  • Story: Annual rites of seasonal renewal.
  • Eyewitnesses: None.
  • Difference: Fertility ritual, not resurrection.

Mithras (Roman cult):

  • Date: Late 1st c. AD in Rome.
  • Story: Slays bull; Mithras never dies.
  • Eyewitnesses: None.
  • Difference: No resurrection myth at all.

Apollonius of Tyana (Greek philosopher):

  • Date: 1st c. AD; Philostratus, Life of Apollonius (c. AD 217–238).
  • Story: Three endings — (1) dies in Ephesus; (2) dies in Lindus; (3) vanishes in Crete, appears to one disciple.
  • Eyewitnesses: At most, one disciple in one version; others contradict.
  • Difference: Late, legendary, contradictory; no bodily resurrection.

Why Christianity Was Different

By contrast, the Christian proclamation was unique:

  • Early: The resurrection was proclaimed from the very start. Paul’s letters (c. AD 50s) are our earliest Christian writings, but in 1 Corinthians 15:3–7 he cites a creed he himself “received” from the Jerusalem church — most scholars date this creed to within five years of Jesus’ death (c. AD 30–35).
  • Historical: Located in Jerusalem under Pontius Pilate. Tacitus (c. AD 115) confirms: “Christus, the founder of the name, was put to death by the procurator Pontius Pilate, during the reign of Tiberius.” — Annals 15.44 (Loeb)
    Even atheist or agnostic historians today agree on three facts: Jesus lived, was crucified under Pilate, and his followers soon claimed to see him alive.
  • Eyewitnessed: Paul lists appearances:
    1. To Cephas (Peter)
    2. To the Twelve
    3. To more than five hundred at once (most still alive when Paul wrote)
    4. To James (the brother of Jesus)
    5. To all the apostles
    6. Finally, to Paul himself
      Plus, we have four independent Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, AD 65–95), each preserving distinct traditions but united in testifying to Jesus’ crucifixion, burial, and resurrection.
  • Bodily: Jesus left behind an empty tomb and ate with disciples; not a ghost, not apotheosis.
  • Transformative: These claims produced communities whose lives of charity and moral transformation astonished even critics.

Conclusion

Christianity wasn’t “just another mystery religion.”

  • It was exclusive like Judaism, but universal in scope.
  • It demanded moral transformation, not just ritual.
  • It built enduring communities of care unmatched in Roman society — nursing plague victims, rescuing exposed infants, treating every life as sacred.
  • And it proclaimed not a seasonal myth or apotheosis, but a historical resurrection, rooted in eyewitness testimony and confirmed by transformed lives.

By AD 300, Christians numbered in the millions. By AD 350, they were half the empire. What began as a small sect in Jerusalem became the movement that reshaped the world.

Why Even Atheist Historians Believe in John the Baptist

/ Jason Conrad / Leave a comment

What kind of world crucified Jesus—and why do even atheist historians agree that John the Baptist was real? This post explores the reign of Emperor Tiberius (AD 14–37) and the volatile political and religious landscape of Judea under Roman rule. It was during this time that both John the Baptist and Jesus of Nazareth were executed. And just one year later, Paul the Apostle was converted. Drawing on the writings of Josephus, Philo, and Tacitus, we’ll see how Rome responded to charismatic Jewish voices—and how their attempts to silence those voices only fueled the Christian movement.

“Now in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar…”

That line from Luke 3:1 grounds the Gospel narrative in historical time. Tiberius ruled from AD 14 to 37. The fifteenth year corresponds to AD 28 or 29. Pontius Pilate was the governor of Judea. And John the Baptist was already preaching in the wilderness.

John the Baptist: A Voice Rome Couldn’t Ignore

Historians—including secular and even atheist scholars—agree that John the Baptist is one of the most historically verifiable figures from the New Testament. Why?

  • He’s documented in multiple independent sources: all four Gospels and the writings of Josephus, a Jewish historian with no sympathy for Christianity.
  • He presents a “criterion of embarrassment”—Jesus submits to baptism by John, which would suggest moral inferiority. The early church wouldn’t have invented that.
  • His role fits perfectly into first-century Jewish culture, when prophetic voices were seen as potential threats under Roman occupation.
  • His preaching content cited by Josephus matches what the Gospel accounts share as well.

Josephus was born in AD 37, just a few years after John’s death. He would have grown up among people who had heard John preach. Here’s Josephus’s full account:

“Now some of the Jews thought that the destruction of Herod’s army came from God, and that it was a very just punishment for what he had done against John, who was called the Baptist. For Herod had killed this good man, who had exhorted the Jews to lead righteous lives, to practice justice toward their fellows and piety toward God, and so doing join in baptism. In his view this was a necessary preliminary if baptism was to be acceptable to God. They must not employ it to gain pardon for whatever sins they committed, but as a consecration of the body, implying that the soul was already cleansed by right behavior.

When others too joined the crowds about him because they were aroused to the highest degree by his sermons, Herod became alarmed. Eloquence that had so great an effect on mankind might lead to some form of sedition, for it looked as if they would do everything he counseled. Herod decided, therefore, that it would be much better to strike first and be rid of him than to wait until a disturbance broke out and he had to act when it was too late. Because of Herod’s suspicions, John was sent in chains to the fortress of Machaerus, which we have previously mentioned, and there put to death. The Jews, to this day, hold that the destruction of his army was a punishment sent upon Herod by God, a mark of his disapproval of what he had done against John.”
—Josephus, Antiquities 18.5.2

John was not a violent revolutionary. He called people to repentance and moral renewal. But Herod Antipas feared his influence. The people were ready to “do everything he counseled.” In a Roman client state, that was enough to warrant execution.

Pilate Provokes—and Then Bows to Pressure

Pontius Pilate, appointed by Tiberius, governed Judea from AD 26 to 36. He was known for provoking Jewish unrest. Here’s how Josephus describes one early incident, when Pilate introduced Roman standards bearing Caesar’s image into Jerusalem:

“But now Pilate, the procurator of Judaea, brought into Jerusalem by night and under cover the effigies of Caesar that are called standards. The next day this caused a great uproar among the Jews. Those who were shocked by the incident went in a body to Pilate at Caesarea and for many days begged him to remove the standards from Jerusalem. When he refused, they fell to the ground and remained motionless for five days and nights. On the sixth day Pilate took his seat on the tribunal in the great stadium and summoned the multitude, as if he meant to grant their petition. Instead, he gave a signal to the soldiers to surround the Jews, and threatened to cut them down unless they stopped pressing their petition. But they threw themselves on the ground and bared their necks, shouting that they would welcome death rather than the violation of their laws. Deeply impressed by their religious fervor, Pilate ordered the standards to be removed from Jerusalem.”
—Josephus, Antiquities 18.3.1

Thousands of Jews lay on the ground, necks exposed, ready to die. Pilate backed down. But this moment revealed his tendency to provoke until things nearly exploded.

Philo also describes Pilate’s recklessness—this time involving golden shields inscribed with the emperor’s name:

“Pilate, who had been appointed prefect of Judaea, displayed the shields in Herod’s palace in the Holy City. They bore no image—only an inscription. But when the people learned what had been done, and realized that their laws had been trampled underfoot, they petitioned Pilate to remove the shields. He steadfastly refused. Then they took the matter to Tiberius, who was indignant that Pilate had dared to offend religious sentiments and ordered him by letter to remove the shields immediately and transfer them to Caesarea.”
—Philo, Embassy to Gaius, §§299–305

Pilate was politically clumsy and religiously tone-deaf. But this is the man who would oversee the crucifixion of Jesus.

Tacitus Confirms the Crucifixion

Even Tacitus, the great Roman historian, confirms the execution of Jesus—and notes that Rome failed to stop what it had begun:

“Christus, the founder of the name, had undergone the death penalty in the reign of Tiberius, by sentence of the procurator Pontius Pilatus, and the pernicious superstition was checked for a moment, only to break out once more, not merely in Judea, the home of the disease, but in the capital itself, where all things horrible or shameful in the world collect and find a vogue.”
—Tacitus, Annals 15.44

This phrase—“checked for a moment”—reveals Rome’s belief that the crucifixion had ended the Jesus movement. But instead, it spread.

Tacitus calls Christianity a “pernicious superstition”—a key Roman legal category.

Religio vs. Superstitio: Why Rome Saw Christians as Dangerous

To the Roman mind:

  • Religio referred to official, ancestral, state-sponsored worship—gods like Jupiter or Mars, or the emperor himself.
  • Superstitio meant foreign, irrational, and unauthorized religion—often seen as destabilizing.

By labeling Christianity as a superstition rather than a religio, Tacitus reveals how Rome legally and socially marginalized the movement. It wasn’t just false—it was disruptive and subversive.

“Let the very mention of the cross be far removed not only from the body of a Roman citizen, but from his thoughts, his eyes, his ears.”
—Cicero, Against Verres 2.5.168

The cross was something to be erased from polite society. But the early Christians made it the centerpiece of their message.

AD 31: The Conversion of Paul

In AD 31, just one year after Jesus was crucified, Saul of Tarsus—a Roman citizen and a Pharisee—was converted. He would become Paul the Apostle, and his letters would one day be copied across the empire.

Conclusion: “Checked for the Moment”

When Tiberius died in AD 37, John the Baptist had been silenced, Jesus had been crucified, and Paul had been converted. Rome thought it had preserved peace. But instead, it had launched a kingdom that would spread from Judea to the capital.

Tacitus said the movement was “checked for the moment.”

But that moment didn’t last.

How We Know Paul’s Letters Were Accurately Preserved

/ Jason Conrad / Leave a comment

How do we know that the Apostle Paul’s original letters—written between 48 and 64 AD—were accurately transmitted before our earliest surviving manuscript copy from around 200 AD?

In this post, we walk through internal evidence from the New Testament, quotes from early Christian leaders, and even comparisons with other ancient writings. The result is a compelling historical case for the reliable preservation of Paul’s seven undisputed letters: Romans, 1–2 Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, 1 Thessalonians, and Philemon.

Comparing Paul to Other Ancient Authors

Before jumping into Christian sources, let’s compare Paul’s letters with other ancient texts that historians accept without controversy:

AuthorWorkDate WrittenEarliest CopyTime Gap
JosephusJewish War75–79 AD9th century~800 years
TacitusAnnals~100 AD~850 AD~750 years
Pliny the YoungerLetters~100–112 AD~850 AD~750 years
SuetoniusLives of the Caesars~121 AD9th century~700–800 years
Paul the Apostle7 Undisputed Letters48–64 AD~175–200 AD (P46)~125–150 years

Paul’s letters have the shortest gap between composition and manuscript evidence—yet are often treated with far more suspicion. Why?

Internal Evidence from Paul’s Own Letters

Even during Paul’s lifetime, his letters were being circulated and discussed:

1 Corinthians 1:2
“To the church of God which is at Corinth… with all who in every place call on the name of Jesus Christ our Lord.”

2 Corinthians 1:1
“To the church of God which is at Corinth, with all the saints who are in all Achaia.”

Galatians 1:2
“To the churches of Galatia.”

These greetings show that Paul’s letters were meant for entire regions, not just local churches.

2 Corinthians 10:10
“For his letters,” they say, “are weighty and powerful, but his bodily presence is weak, and his speech contemptible.”

Even his opponents knew and discussed his letters, plural—during his lifetime.

2 Peter 3:15–16 (likely early 60s AD):
“…as also in all his epistles… as they do also the rest of the Scriptures.”

Paul’s letters were already being grouped together and treated as Scripture.

Colossians 4:16 (disputed):
“…see that it is read also in the church of the Laodiceans…”

Bart Ehrman, agnostic scholar:
“The passage in Colossians suggests that even by the time of its composition—whoever wrote it—there was a custom of circulating Christian letters.” (Forged, 2011)

Early Christian Witness (95–180 AD)

Clement of Rome (c. 95 AD)
“Take up the epistle of the blessed Paul the Apostle. What did he write to you at the time when the Gospel first began to be preached?” (1 Clement 47)

Clement assumes the Corinthians still had Paul’s letter over 40 years later.

David F. Wright (Christian historian):
“The rhetoric and theological framing of 1 Clement are unmistakably Pauline, using patterns found in Galatians and Romans—even where exact verbal citation is absent.” (Journal of Ecclesiastical History, 2014)

Ignatius of Antioch (c. 110 AD)
“You are associates in the mysteries with Paul… who in every letter makes mention of you in Christ Jesus.” (To the Ephesians 12.2)

Ignatius refers to “every letter” of Paul, indicating a corpus already known to his readers.

Michael Holmes (Christian textual scholar):
“Ignatius’s epistles are built upon the structure and tone of Paul, especially in areas such as ecclesiology and unity.” (The Apostolic Fathers, 2nd ed.)

Polycarp of Smyrna (c. 110–140 AD)
“The blessed Paul wrote letters to you… which, if you study them, you will be able to build yourselves up in the faith.” (To the Philippians 3.2)

Polycarp speaks of “letters” plural—implying either multiple communications or a collection.

Kenneth Berding (Christian professor of New Testament):
“Polycarp’s theology and phraseology… show clear mimēsis of Pauline thought—not mere influence, but conscious imitation.” (Polycarp and Paul, Brill)

Theophilus of Antioch (c. 180 AD)
“Paul says: ‘If you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you shall be saved.’” (To Autolycus 3.14, quoting Romans 10:9)

Theophilus refers to Romans as “Scripture.”

Irenaeus of Lyons (c. 180 AD)
“Paul… ‘There is one God… and one Lord Jesus Christ.’” (Against Heresies 3.12.12, quoting 1 Corinthians 8:6)

Irenaeus quotes all seven undisputed letters and explicitly names Paul.

Canon Lists and Heretical Canons

The Muratorian Fragment (c. 170–200 AD)
“As to the epistles of Paul, they themselves make clear to those desiring to understand which ones they are. First of all, he wrote to the Corinthians, addressing them in two letters. Then to the Ephesians, to the Philippians, to the Colossians, to the Galatians, to the Thessalonians—twice, and to the Romans. It is plain that he wrote these letters for the sake of instruction. There is yet another addressed to Philemon, one to Titus, and two to Timothy in affection and love. These are held sacred in the esteem of the Church and form part of the universal Church’s discipline and teaching.”

Marcion’s Canon (c. 140 AD)
The first known Christian canon was created by a heretic—and it included 10 Pauline letters.

Bart Ehrman:
“Marcion’s canon shows that the letters of Paul were already being collected and circulated as a group by the early second century.” (Lost Christianities, 2003)

The Importance of John’s Long Life

Irenaeus (c. 180 AD):
“Then John, the disciple of the Lord… lived on until the times of Trajan.” (Against Heresies 3.1.1)

Polycrates of Ephesus (c. 190 AD):
“John… being a priest, wore the high-priestly plate.”

If John was 20 years old in 30 AD, he would have been about 90 when Trajan’s reign began in 98 AD—allowing him to influence and oversee the preservation of apostolic teaching decades after Paul’s death.

Richard Bauckham:
“The Beloved Disciple… may well have been quite young during Jesus’ ministry. This possibility makes good sense of the tradition that he lived to extreme old age.” (Jesus and the Eyewitnesses, 2006)

Bart Ehrman:
“It is certainly possible—indeed plausible—that John was very young when he followed Jesus, which would help explain the later traditions about his longevity.” (How Jesus Became God, 2014)

Conclusion: Proven by Perseverance

We don’t have Paul’s original letters.
And we don’t have an unbroken chain of manuscripts from 50 to 200 AD.

But what we do have may be even more compelling:
A generation of people who lived and died for Paul’s message.

They didn’t preserve his letters in silence.
They preserved them through suffering.

They weren’t philosophers in libraries—they were men and women who had seen their lives overturned. Enemies became brothers. The immoral became upright. The fearful became fearless. And when persecution came, they didn’t flinch. They held to Paul’s gospel of Christ crucified and risen—because they had seen its power.

They copied Paul’s words because they were living what those words described.
They circulated them because they believed others could encounter the same Spirit they had.
And they called them Scripture because, to them, no other explanation made sense.

Miracles were reported. Communities of mutual love sprang up where none had existed. Even skeptics were forced to admit: something had changed.

If you’re agnostic, this doesn’t demand blind faith.

It invites a hard look at the kind of people who believed Paul’s words—and what happened when they did.

We’re not just trusting that the church preserved his letters.

We’re trusting why they preserved them.

Because those letters changed lives.

How Accurate Are Paul’s Letters? What the Manuscripts and Scholars Say

/ Jason Conrad / Leave a comment

Manuscript Evidence for the Seven Undisputed Letters

Can we really know what Paul wrote nearly 2,000 years ago? This post explores the earliest manuscripts, key textual variants, and what even secular scholars say about the reliability of Paul’s seven undisputed letters.

Whether you approach the Bible with faith or skepticism, the transmission of Paul’s seven undisputed letters offers a rare meeting point where historians and believers find surprising agreement. These seven letters—Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, 1 Thessalonians, and Philemon—are universally accepted by scholars as genuine works of Paul. But can we be confident that the words we read today are the same ones Paul wrote in the 50s AD?

What Manuscripts Do We Actually Have?

Before the invention of the printing press, texts were copied by hand. That led to thousands of variations over time. But for Paul’s seven undisputed letters, we have a remarkable collection of early manuscripts and translations.

Approximate counts by language:

  • Greek: ~900 manuscripts
  • Latin: 3,000–4,000+ manuscripts
  • Coptic: 200–300 manuscripts
  • Syriac: 200–300 manuscripts
  • Other languages (Armenian, Gothic, Ethiopic, etc.): ~500 combined

Bart Ehrman, an agnostic scholar, says:
“We have more manuscripts of the New Testament than any other book from antiquity—many thousands. And many of these manuscripts date from quite early times.”
(Misquoting Jesus, 2005)

The Earliest Manuscript: P46

The earliest confirmed manuscript of Paul’s seven letters is Papyrus 46 (P46), dated between 175–225 AD.

It was discovered in Egypt and now resides in both Dublin and Michigan. It originally had 104 leaves, but only 86 survive.

P46 includes the following:

  • Romans 5:17–16:27 (chapters 1–5:16 are missing)
  • 1 Corinthians 1:1–15:58 (chapter 16 missing)
  • 2 Corinthians 1:1–9:6 (chapters 9:7–13:13 missing)
  • Galatians: fully preserved
  • Philippians: fully preserved
  • 1 Thessalonians: fully preserved
  • Philemon: not included—likely in the missing final leaves

Brent Nongbri, a secular papyrologist, says:
“There is little doubt that additional material once followed the current end of the manuscript.”

By 200 AD, Paul’s letters were already being copied and circulated as a collection—less than 150 years after they were written.

Manuscripts Between 200 and 325 AD

To bridge the gap between Paul and the major codices of the fourth century, we have three key papyrus fragments:

  • P30 (c. 225–250): 1 Thessalonians 4:12–5:18
  • P65 (c. 200–250): 1 Thessalonians 1:3–2:13
  • P87 (c. 250–300): Philemon 13–15, 24–25

These fragments confirm continued copying of Paul’s letters across different regions before Christianity was legalized.

Then Come the Codices

Two of the most important Greek Bibles appear shortly after 325 AD:

  • Codex Vaticanus (c. 325–350): Contains all 7 undisputed letters; preserved in the Vatican Library
  • Codex Sinaiticus (c. 330–360): Also contains all 7; discovered at St. Catherine’s Monastery in Sinai

Despite coming from different regions, they show strong agreement with each other and with earlier papyri like P46 and P87.

Early Translations

By the early 4th century, Paul’s letters had also been translated into major Christian languages:

  • Old Latin (c. 250–300): Includes Romans and Galatians
  • Coptic (Sahidic dialect) (c. 300–325): Includes Galatians
  • Syriac: Citations from the letters appear by the early 4th century

This wide translation effort confirms the value and authority of Paul’s letters in diverse early communities.

What About Textual Variants?

Across all manuscripts of Paul’s seven letters, scholars estimate about 7,000–8,000 textual variants. That number may sound high—until you consider that these variants are spread across thousands of manuscripts written by hand over centuries.

More importantly, the vast majority of these variants are completely insignificant—they affect spelling, word order, or have no impact on the meaning at all.

Two Examples of Insignificant Variants:

Romans 12:11

  • “Serve the Lord” vs. “Serve the Spirit”
    🡒 The difference is one Greek word—both emphasize faithful living and make theological sense.

Galatians 1:3

  • “God our Father” vs. “God the Father”
    🡒 Both readings are grammatically and doctrinally acceptable. No core teaching is affected.

Bart Ehrman comments:
“Most of the textual changes in our manuscripts are completely insignificant.”
(Misquoting Jesus, 2005)

But Are There Any That Matter?

Yes, a few variants are more significant. Here are five that are often discussed:

Romans 8:1

  • Short: “There is therefore now no condemnation…”
  • Long: adds “…who walk not according to the flesh…”
    🡒 The longer phrase is likely borrowed from verse 4—a case of scribal harmonization.

1 Thessalonians 2:7

  • “We were gentle among you” vs. “We were like children among you”
    🡒 The difference hinges on a single Greek letter. Both are consistent with Paul’s tone and message.

Galatians 2:12

  • Some manuscripts omit “certain men from James”
    🡒 Possibly removed to soften the perceived tension between Paul and the Jerusalem church.

1 Corinthians 14:34–35

  • These verses about women keeping silent appear in different places in some manuscripts or are marked with symbols
    🡒 Their placement suggests that some early copyists were unsure of their originality.

Romans 5:1

  • “We have peace…” vs. “Let us have peace…”
    🡒 A single vowel shifts the tone from statement to exhortation—both readings are ancient and meaningful.

Even in these cases, none of the variants creates a contradiction or changes Christian doctrine. They are precisely the kind of variations you’d expect in a vast and ancient copying tradition.

Eldon J. Epp, a respected textual critic, concludes:
“The massive number of manuscripts gives us confidence in recovering a reliable text.”
(Perspectives on New Testament Textual Criticism, 2005)

Conclusion: We Can Know What Paul Wrote

Paul’s letters were written around 50 AD. By 200 AD, we have Papyrus 46. Between 200 and 325, we have fragmentary manuscripts and early translations. By 350, we have complete codices that show strong agreement with the earlier copies.

Despite being copied by hand for centuries, the content of Paul’s seven letters remains remarkably stable.

What we read today is—by all major accounts—what Paul wrote.

When Philosophy Clashed with the Cross: Gentile Rejections of the Christ Hymn

/ Jason Conrad / Leave a comment

In Philippians 2:6–11, one of the earliest Christian hymns declares a staggering paradox: that Jesus Christ, “being in very nature God,” humbled himself to become human and die on a cross—only to be exalted and receive divine worship. This exalted Christ Hymn wasn’t a late invention. It shaped the faith of the first Christians and the apostles themselves.

But not everyone accepted that message.

Historical evidence shows that in the first century, only four divergent movements challenged the apostolic view of Christ. Just one of them—the Nazarenes—existed before 70 AD, and they still affirmed Jesus’ divinity. The other three arose later, as responses from Jewish and Greco-Roman worlds that struggled to accept the core paradox of the Christ Hymn: that the eternal God became human and suffered.

A Quick Recap: The Jewish Divergents

The Nazarenes and Ebionites were early Jewish-Christian groups primarily based in Judea and later Pella. While the Nazarenes affirmed Christ’s divinity, the Ebionites denied it completely, rejected Paul, and altered Matthew’s Gospel to support their theology.

But outside Judea, new challenges arose—fueled by Greek philosophy, mystical speculation, and a deep discomfort with a suffering God.

Cerinthus (c. 80 AD): A Divinity Too High to Suffer

Cerinthus lived in Asia Minor and was shaped by Egyptian education, Jewish thought, and Platonic dualism. These influences led him to deny that a divine being could fully enter the material world, let alone suffer on a cross. His solution? Separate the divine “Christ” from the human Jesus.

Irenaeus – Against Heresies 1.26.1 (c. 180 AD):
“He represented Jesus as having not been born of a virgin… while Christ descended upon him at his baptism, and then departed again before the Passion.”

Epiphanius – Panarion 28.2.1–2 (c. 375 AD):
“Cerinthus… opposed the apostles… especially Paul… and said that it was not right to accept the epistles of Paul.”

Cerinthus also rejected the idea that the supreme God created the world:

Irenaeus – Against Heresies 1.26.1:
“He asserted that the world was not made by the primary God, but by a certain Power far separated from Him…”

This idea reflected Platonic thought:

Philo of Alexandria – On the Creation (c. 20 BC–50 AD):
“It is not lawful to suppose that the supreme God comes into contact with any corruptible thing.”

Plutarch – On Isis and Osiris (c. 100 AD):
“Matter… being evil, could not have been made by a good God… The world must have been fashioned by an inferior deity.”

Cerinthus even promoted false writings under apostolic names:

Eusebius – Ecclesiastical History 3.28.2 (c. 310 AD, quoting Caius of Rome):
“Cerinthus… made use of revelations which he pretended were written by a great apostle…”

Epiphanius – Panarion 28.4.1:
“Cerinthus used only the Gospel according to the Hebrews… He rejected the Apostle Paul completely.”

Most memorably, John the Apostle wanted nothing to do with him:

Irenaeus – Against Heresies 3.3.4:
“John… perceiving Cerinthus within [a bathhouse], rushed out… exclaiming, ‘Let us flee, lest even the bath-house fall down!’”

Cerinthus didn’t simply interpret Jesus differently—he broke entirely from the apostolic tradition, rejected Paul, replaced the Gospels, and rewrote the story. His system preserved a lofty divinity but could not accept that God became flesh—as the Christ Hymn declares.

Docetism (Rooted in the 80s, Expanding in the 2nd Century): Too Divine to Be Human

Where Cerinthus separated Christ from Jesus, Docetism denied Jesus’ humanity altogether. The name comes from dokein (“to seem”)—Jesus only appeared to suffer, appear in the flesh, or die.

John’s letters refute this directly:

1 John 4:2–3:
“Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God…”

2 John 7:
“Many deceivers… do not confess Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.”

Docetists didn’t just reinterpret Jesus—they created new documents to promote their view. Here are three major examples:

🔹 Gospel of Peter (late 1st–early 2nd century)

“[Jesus] kept silent as feeling no pain… The Lord cried aloud, ‘My Power, my Power, you have forsaken me!’ And having said it, He was taken up.”

In this account, Jesus’ suffering is denied and his death portrayed as a moment of spiritual release. The body remains, but the divine presence departs—typical of Docetic theology.

Serapion of Antioch – Ecclesiastical History 6.12.6 (c. 190 AD):
“The writings which falsely bear their names we reject, knowing that such were not handed down to us.”

🔹 Acts of John (late 2nd century)

“Sometimes when I walked with him, I would try to touch his body, but it was immaterial… he left no footprints on the ground.”

This portrayal of Jesus as ghostlike reinforces Docetism’s core claim: Jesus’ physicality was a divine illusion.

🔹 Gospel of Judas (late 2nd century)

Though it bears the name of one of Jesus’ disciples, the Gospel of Judas radically reimagines the story of Jesus from a Gnostic and Docetic perspective. In this account, Jesus laughs at the ignorance of his disciples, praises Judas for helping him escape his fleshly prison, and teaches a cosmic creation myth where the true God is utterly separate from the material world.

Gospel of Judas 33.10–11:
“Often he did not appear to his disciples as himself, but he was found among them as a child.”

Here, Jesus is portrayed as a shapeshifter, one whose form is unstable and deceptive. This aligns with Docetic views that Jesus’ physical appearance was an illusion—not essential to his being.

Jesus then teaches that the world was created not by the high God, but by rebellious lower angels:

Gospel of Judas 47.1–9:
“Come, that I may teach you about the [secrets] no person has ever seen. For there exists a great and boundless realm… A luminous cloud appeared there. He said, ‘Let an angel come into being as my attendant.’”

Gospel of Judas 51.1–8:
“Let twelve angels come into being to rule over chaos… An angel appeared whose face flashed with fire… His name was Nebro, which means ‘rebel’; others call him Yaldabaoth. Another angel, Saklas, also came from the cloud.”

Then comes a twisted echo of Genesis:

Gospel of Judas 52.10–11:
“Saklas said to his angels, ‘Let us create a human being after the likeness and the image.’”

Here, the creation of humanity is attributed to fallen or ignorant beings—echoing Cerinthus’s own view that the world was created by a lesser, ignorant power.

Finally, Jesus tells Judas:

Gospel of Judas 56.18–20:
“You will exceed all of them. For you will sacrifice the man that clothes me.”

The crucifixion isn’t seen as atonement but escape from a fleshly shell. This is Docetism to its core.

Ignatius – Smyrnaeans 2.1 (c. 110 AD):
“He truly suffered… not as certain unbelievers say, that he suffered in appearance only.”

Ignatius – Trallians 10.1:
“Be deaf… to anyone who speaks apart from Jesus Christ… who was truly born… truly crucified…”

Conclusion: Rewriting the Story

The Nazarenes, Ebionites, Cerinthians, and Docetists are the only four divergent groups we have clear evidence for in the first century. Only the Nazarenes remained loyal to the divine Jesus of the Christ Hymn.

The other three:

  • Couldn’t accept the full mystery of Christ as fully divine and fully human.
  • Rejected the apostolic witness—especially Paul—and altered or replaced canonical texts.
  • Wrote their own “gospels” and “acts” to support their alternative visions of Jesus.

They didn’t represent equal versions of early Christianity. They were reactions to it—distortions of the message that had already been “handed down” and “received.”

“Who, being in the form of God… emptied Himself… became obedient to the point of death—even death on a cross. Therefore God also has highly exalted Him…”
(Philippians 2:6–9)

That is the Jesus the apostles preached. That is the Jesus the earliest believers worshiped.

Divergence from Christ’s Divinity: What the First-Century Evidence Actually Shows

/ Jason Conrad / Leave a comment

Welcome to Living the Bible, where we examine the Bible and church history to guide our everyday living. I’m Jason Conrad.

In our previous post, we explored the Christ Hymn of Philippians 2:6–11—a poetic confession that predates Paul’s letters and proclaims Jesus’ divine pre-existence, incarnation, death, and exaltation. This hymn is powerful because it reflects what Christians were already saying and singing about Jesus before the Gospels were written.

But if this high Christology was the original belief, how soon did it face opposition? Were there really many versions of Jesus circulating in the first century, as some modern scholars suggest?

This post will take you directly to the earliest sources, not later summaries or theories. What we find is that, far from a chaotic diversity of Christianities, we see one core proclamation of a divine Christ—and only four identifiable groups that diverged from it during the first century. And even among these, only one group clearly denied Christ’s divinity.

The Nazarenes – 40s AD

Law-Observant Believers Who Affirmed Christ’s Divinity

The Nazarenes are the earliest group to diverge from the apostolic church—not in their view of Jesus, but in their insistence on continued Torah observance. They appear to be the group on the losing side of the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15:

“But some of the sect of the Pharisees who believed rose up, saying, ‘It is necessary to circumcise them and to command them to keep the law of Moses.’” (Acts 15:5)

Though the Council determined that Gentiles were not bound to keep the Law, these Jewish believers did not abandon their heritage. The name “Nazarene,” which originally applied to all Christians (Acts 24:5), gradually came to refer specifically to Jewish Christians who continued observing the Mosaic Law.

James, the brother of Jesus and leader of the Jerusalem church, likely maintained peace and inclusion with these believers. His advice to Paul in Acts 21 seems designed to show the law-observant Jewish Christians that Paul respected their customs:

“You see, brother, how many myriads of Jews there are who have believed, and they are all zealous for the law… Therefore do what we tell you: We have four men who have taken a vow.” (Acts 21:20, 23)

Even though the Nazarenes clung to the Law, they never rejected the divinity of Christ.

Jerome’s Testimony (c. 398–403 AD)

Letter 75 to Augustine:

“The adherents to this sect are known commonly as Nazarenes; they believe in Christ the Son of God, born of the Virgin Mary; and they say that He who suffered under Pontius Pilate and rose again is the same as the one in whom we believe.”

Commentary on Isaiah 8:14:

“The Nazarenes… accept Messiah in such a way that they do not cease to observe the old Law.”

Jerome—writing after the ecumenical councils of Nicaea (325 AD) and Constantinople (381 AD) had carefully defined the Church’s doctrine of Christ’s divinity—still affirms that the Nazarenes believed in “the same” Jesus. This is profoundly important: after all the theological scrutiny of the early church, Jerome still saw their Christology as sound.

Epiphanius’ Ambivalence – Panarion 29.7.5–6 (c. 375 AD)

“They are different from Jews, and different from Christians, only in the following ways. They disagree with Jews because of their belief in Christ; but they are not in accord with Christians because they are still fettered by the Law—circumcision, the Sabbath, and the rest.
As to Christ, I cannot say whether they too are misled by the wickedness of Cerinthus and Merinthus, and regard him as a mere man—or whether, as the truth is, they affirm that he was born of Mary by the Holy Spirit.”

This quote is remarkable. Epiphanius was infamous for aggressively labeling deviations as heresy. The fact that he admits he doesn’t know if the Nazarenes denied Christ’s divinity tells us a lot—if he had any evidence they denied it, he would have used it.

The Ebionites – After 70 AD

A Breakaway Group That Denied Christ’s Divinity

The Ebionites represent the earliest clearly documented group to reject the divinity of Jesus. Unlike the Nazarenes, they stripped away central elements of Christology—the virgin birth, the pre-existence of Christ, and the apostleship of Paul.

Their origins appear after the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD, when Christians fled to Pella.

Eusebius – Ecclesiastical History 3.5.3 (c. 323 AD)

“But the people of the church in Jerusalem had been commanded by a revelation, vouchsafed to approved men there before the war, to leave the city and to dwell in a certain town of Peraea called Pella.”

Epiphanius – Panarion 29.7.7–8 (c. 375 AD)

“The Ebionites are later than the Nazoraeans, and they came after them. At first their sect began after the flight from Jerusalem, when all the disciples went to live in Pella because of Christ’s prophecy.”

So we can date the rise of the Ebionites to after 70 AD, not before. This was not just a chronological shift—it was a theological fracture. Where the Nazarenes remained within the church and affirmed Christ’s divinity, the Ebionites pulled away entirely, creating a group that:

  • Denied Jesus’ divinity
  • Rejected the virgin birth
  • Falsified Scripture
  • Rejected Paul as a false apostle

Irenaeus – Against Heresies 1.26.2 (c. 180 AD)

“They use the Gospel according to Matthew only, and repudiate the Apostle Paul, maintaining that he was an apostate from the Law.”

Origen – Commentary on Matthew 16.12 (c. 248 AD)

“The Ebionites believe that He was a mere man, born of Joseph and Mary according to the common course of nature, and that He became righteous through the progress of His moral character.”

Eusebius – Ecclesiastical History 3.27 (c. 323 AD)

“They considered Him a plain and common man… born of Mary and Joseph… justified only because of his progress in virtue.”

Epiphanius – Panarion 30.14.3 (c. 375 AD)

“They falsify the genealogical tables in Matthew’s Gospel… This is because they maintain that Jesus is really a man.”

This is key: they removed the virgin birth from Matthew, altering the Gospel to support their theology.

Epiphanius – Panarion 30.16.6–9

“They declare that [Paul] was a Greek… When he failed to get [a priest’s daughter], he flew into a rage and wrote against circumcision and against the sabbath and the Law.”

In contrast to all other groups, the Ebionites knew they were severing themselves from the apostolic church. They rejected Paul’s letters outright and manipulated Scripture to reflect their theology.

Their theology was not just a different emphasis—it was a deliberate break from the Christian movement centered around Jesus as divine.

Conclusion

This evidence confronts a popular scholarly claim: that early Christianity was a landscape of conflicting “Christianities.” What we actually see—based on the earliest surviving sources—is far more limited:

  • One unified apostolic church affirming Christ’s divine identity
  • One group (Nazarenes) that remained inside the church while emphasizing the Mosaic Law
  • One group (Ebionites) that, after 70 AD, openly rejected Christ’s divinity, Paul’s authority, and Gospel material

The others—Cerinthians and Docetists—will be covered in the next post, but neither appears before 70 AD. That means there is only one group we know of before 70 AD that diverged from the apostolic tradition—and they still upheld Christ’s divine nature.

Only after the fall of Jerusalem do we see the first deliberate rejection of Jesus’ divinity. And even then, it was just one group, not many.

In short: the myth of “many Christianities” in the first century is not supported by the evidence. The overwhelming testimony of early sources shows a consistent, early affirmation of Jesus as divine—proclaimed, preserved, and only slowly challenged as the church spread.

A Hymn Older Than the Gospels Calls Jesus Divine

/ Jason Conrad / Leave a comment

One of the most repeated claims in modern New Testament scholarship is that the early church gradually elevated Jesus to divine status. The argument often follows a literary timeline: Jesus starts out as a humble, misunderstood teacher in the Gospel of Mark (dated around AD 70) and ends up boldly identified as divine in the Gospel of John (around AD 90). That evolution, we’re told, reveals how Jesus went from man to God in the minds of believers.

But that narrative collapses when we examine the earliest Christian writings.

What’s the Real Timeline?

Even if we follow the timeline laid out by non-Christian scholars, the literary progression of early Christianity looks like this:

  1. Early creeds, hymns, and poems — AD 30–45
  2. Paul’s seven undisputed letters — AD 48–61
  3. The Gospels — AD 70–100

If you want to know what the first Christians believed about Jesus, you don’t start with the Gospels. And you don’t even start with Paul’s theological reflections. You start with the traditions he inherited, many of which he quotes within his letters.

One of the clearest examples is a passage in Philippians 2:6–11, widely regarded as a pre-Pauline hymn.

Philippians 2:6–11 (ESV)

Who, though he was in the form of God,
did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped,
but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant,
being born in the likeness of men.
And being found in human form,
he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death—even death on a cross.

Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name,
so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,
in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord,
to the glory of God the Father.

Why This Passage Matters

The structure and elevated language of Philippians 2:6–11 mark it as distinct from Paul’s usual prose. Nearly all scholars agree—this is not original to Paul, but a hymn he quotes from early Christian worship.

Even Bart Ehrman, a leading atheist scholar, wrote:

“This passage appears to embody an early Christian hymn… possibly dating to the 40s CE, and so within a decade or so of Jesus’ death.”
— How Jesus Became God (2014)

The late Gerd Lüdemann, also an atheist and a critical historian, wrote:

“The passage is a pre-Pauline hymn which was composed within a few years of Jesus’ death.”
— The Resurrection of Jesus (1994)

This means that before Paul ever penned his letters, Christians were already worshiping Jesus as preexistent, divine, and exalted by God.

A Chiastic Structure Reveals Its Heart

This passage follows a literary form known as a chiasm—a mirror-like pattern often used in ancient literature to center the most important idea.

Chiastic Structure:

  • A – Divine Lord
    “Being in the form of God… equality with God”
  • B – Loss of all recognition
    “Did not consider equality with God something to exploit… emptied himself”
  • C – Common name
    “Taking the form of a servant… born in human likeness”
  • D – Obedient to death
    “He humbled himself… even death on a cross”
  • C′ – Highest name
    “God gave him the name that is above every name”
  • B′ – Universal recognition
    “Every knee will bow… every tongue confess”
  • A′ – Divine Lord
    “Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father”

The centerpiece is Jesus’ obedient death, which leads to a universal recognition of his lordship—a direct quotation of Isaiah 45:23, where Yahweh declares:

“To me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear allegiance.”

Paul deliberately applies this to Jesus, affirming that the early Christians saw him as sharing in Yahweh’s divine identity.

Jesus Didn’t Cling to Divinity—He Chose Humility

The hymn says Jesus was in the form of God (morphē theou) and had equality with God. Greek philosopher Aristotle explained the word morphē like this:

“The form (morphē) means the essence or reality of a thing—what it truly is.”
— Metaphysics 1032b1–2

So Jesus didn’t become divine—he was divine and chose to let go of that divine privilege.

Paul uses the word harpagmos, meaning “something to be seized or held onto.” Jesus didn’t need to seize equality with God—he already had it. And rather than cling to it, he let it go.

The Greek verbs “emptied himself” (ekenōsen) and “humbled himself” (etapeinōsen) are paired with the reflexive pronoun heauton (“himself”), showing that these were deliberate acts—Jesus chose to give himself.

Crucifixion: The Lowest Shame

Paul doesn’t merely say Jesus died—he highlights that it was “even death on a cross.” Crucifixion wasn’t just painful—it was socially degrading.

Seneca wrote:

“Can anyone be found willing to be fastened to the accursed tree… in long-drawn-out agony?”
— Dialogues 6.20.3

Cicero called crucifixion:

“A most cruel and disgusting punishment.”
— Against Verres 2.5.66

And again:

“The very word ‘cross’ should be far removed not only from the person of a Roman citizen but from his thoughts, his eyes, and his ears.”
— Pro Rabirio 16

That Jesus willingly chose such a death, according to the hymn, is the very reason he is exalted above all.

Jewish Parallels to Exalted Figures

Though the Christ Hymn is unique, early Jewish literature gives us conceptual background:

  • 1 Enoch 48:2–5
    “The Son of Man… was chosen and hidden… all who dwell on earth shall worship before him.”
  • 1 Enoch 69:26–29
    “The Son of Man… all the kings shall fall down and worship him.”
  • 4Q246 (Dead Sea Scrolls)
    “He shall be called the Son of God… all nations shall serve him.”
  • Philo
    “The Logos is the image of God, by which the whole world was created.”
    — On Dreams 1.239
    “God made man according to the image of his own Logos.”
    — Questions on Genesis 2.62

These aren’t Christian writings. They show that Jewish thinkers had already envisioned preexistent, divine-like agents who could be exalted and worshipped—yet none describe such a figure choosing to suffer like Philippians 2 does.

Final Thought: Not a Gradual Climb—A Bold Declaration

Even if we accept the consensus of non-Christian scholars, the Christ Hymn brings us closest to the earliest Christian beliefs.

Long before the Gospels were written, Christians believed Jesus:

  • Preexisted in divine form
  • Humbled himself in obedience
  • Was crucified in shame
  • And was exalted and worshipped as Lord

That’s not a slow myth in the making.

That’s the foundation of the faith—fully formed, right from the start.

Christianity Before Paul: The Traditions He Inherited

/ Jason Conrad / Leave a comment

Was the Apostle Paul the founder of Christianity?

Some critics think so. They argue that Paul transformed the ethical teachings of Jesus into a new religion focused on worshiping Jesus himself.

But when we turn to Paul’s own writings—especially his seven undisputed letters—we find something very different. Paul repeatedly emphasizes that the core beliefs of the Christian faith were not his invention. Instead, he insists he was passing on traditions that were already established in the church before he began his ministry.

This post explores those pre-Pauline traditions and how they directly challenge the idea that Paul “created” Christianity.

The Claim: Paul Invented Christianity

Many modern scholars—especially those skeptical of the Christian faith—assert that Paul is responsible for transforming Jesus into the object of worship.

“The religion of Jesus was transformed into a religion about Jesus. This transformation was largely the work of the apostle Paul.”
— Bart D. Ehrman, Peter, Paul and Mary Magdalene (2006), p. 124

“Paul was the founder of Christianity as a new religion which broke away from Judaism… Jesus himself had no intention of founding a new religion.”
— Hyam Maccoby, The Mythmaker: Paul and the Invention of Christianity (1986), p. 15

But what does Paul say about this in his own letters?

A Pre-Existing Creed: 1 Corinthians 15:3–8

One of the most important passages in all of Paul’s letters is found in 1 Corinthians 15, where he writes:

“For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures, and that He was seen by Cephas, then by the twelve. After that He was seen by over five hundred brethren at once… After that He was seen by James, then by all the apostles. Then last of all He was seen by me also, as by one born out of due time.”
— 1 Corinthians 15:3–8 (NKJV)

Paul’s use of the Greek verbs παραλαμβάνω (“I received”) and παραδίδωμι (“I delivered”) are not casual. These were technical terms for handing down authoritative teaching—especially in rabbinic Judaism.

“Paul explicitly says that he ‘received’ and ‘delivered’ the gospel, using the terminology of the transmission of tradition. This is how Jewish rabbis passed down teachings: from master to disciple.”
— E.P. Sanders, Paul: A Very Short Introduction (2001), p. 50

Even Bart Ehrman acknowledges this:

“Paul is not inventing the creed in 1 Corinthians 15:3–5; he is quoting it. The use of terms like ‘received’ and ‘delivered’ show that it was already being passed on as a tradition.”
— Ehrman, The New Testament (2016), p. 333

Multiple scholars agree that this creed originated within a few years of Jesus’ crucifixion, long before Paul’s letters were written.

“This is the earliest Christian tradition we have. It goes back at least to the early 30s—just a few years after Jesus died.”
— Ehrman, Did Jesus Exist? (2012), p. 230

“The elements in the tradition are to be dated to the first two years after the crucifixion of Jesus… not later than three years.”
— Gerd Lüdemann, The Resurrection of Jesus (1994), p. 38

“The creed in 1 Corinthians 15 must predate Paul. He’s clearly quoting an existing Christian formula.”
— Richard Carrier, On the Historicity of Jesus (2014), p. 536

The Lord’s Supper Tradition: 1 Corinthians 11:23–26

Paul also uses this same tradition language in 1 Corinthians 11, where he recounts Jesus’ words at the Last Supper:

“For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you…” (v. 23)

Even though Paul says he received this “from the Lord,” most scholars interpret this to mean from the Christian tradition about the Lord—not a direct revelation. The language and structure of the passage closely mirror what later appears in Luke 22, indicating that a standardized Eucharistic tradition was already being observed by early Christians before the Gospels were written.

“Paul is recounting a tradition. These were words of Jesus that had already been passed down.”
— Ehrman, The New Testament (2016), p. 333

Tradition Throughout Paul’s Letters

Paul’s other letters confirm the same pattern:

  • Galatians 1:9 – “If anyone preaches any other gospel than what you have received…”
  • Philippians 4:9 – “What you learned and received and heard and saw in me…”
  • Romans 6:17 – “That form of doctrine to which you were delivered…”

Paul consistently uses the language of handing on tradition—not creating it.

The Cultural Context: Jewish and Greco-Roman Parallels

This kind of tradition-based language was not unique to Paul. Both Jewish and Greco-Roman cultures emphasized the faithful transmission of teachings—often using similar terminology.

Jewish Examples

  • Josephus wrote: “…no one has been so bold as either to add anything to them, or to take anything from them, or to make any change in them… And these books have been handed down to us (παραδεδομένα).”
    — Against Apion 1.8
  • Mishnah Avot 1:1 teaches: “Moses received the Torah from Sinai and handed it to Joshua, and Joshua to the elders…”

Greco-Roman Examples

  • Epictetus, the Stoic philosopher, said: “Have you not heard the philosophers say that certain doctrines have been handed down to us?”
    — Discourses 1.9.13
  • Polybius, the Greek historian, commented: “I will not hand down (παραδώσω) this report unless I have verified it from multiple sources.”
    — Histories 12.25e
  • Quintilian, the Roman rhetorician, emphasized continuity of instruction: “Our rhetorical training is drawn from principles passed down by our predecessors, and we must preserve their methods faithfully.”
    — Institutio Oratoria, Preface

Whether written in Greek, Hebrew, or Latin, these texts reflect a shared cultural assumption: important knowledge is preserved by faithfully receiving and handing it on—not inventing it.

That’s exactly how Paul frames his gospel message—using the same vocabulary and logic respected by his Jewish and Gentile audiences alike.

Conclusion: The Real Origin of Christianity

Paul’s letters are the earliest Christian writings we have—but the message they proclaim is even older.

Even scholars who reject the Christian faith affirm that these traditions go back to the earliest days of the Jesus movement—before Paul’s letters, before his ministry, and even before his conversion.

And that’s where skeptical theories run into a contradiction.

Critics like Ehrman and Maccoby want to say that Paul created Christianity. But they also affirm that creeds, hymns, Eucharistic practices, and resurrection proclamations were already circulating before Paul ever wrote a letter.

That raises an important point:

If Paul is simply repeating and passing along what early Christians already believed and practiced, he was not the creator of Christianity.

What Paul gives us is not innovation, but transmission.
Not invention, but inheritance.

So if you want to know what the first Christians believed, you don’t start with the Gospels.
You don’t even really start with Paul’s letters.
You start with the creeds, poems, hymns, and traditions that Paul refers to in his letters to capture Christianity immediately after the crucifixion.

These are the oldest strands of the Christian faith—and they directly contradict the idea that Paul was its architect.
Instead, he was its most faithful messenger.

When Atheists and Christians Agree: The 7 Undisputed Letters of Paul

/ Jason Conrad / Leave a comment

What if one of the most skeptical atheist scholars and one of the most influential agnostic historians both agree that seven letters in the New Testament were genuinely written by Paul? That’s not just a talking point—it’s a shared conclusion across the scholarly spectrum, and it’s a powerful starting point for understanding the roots of Christianity.

These are known as the seven undisputed letters of Paul—Galatians, 1 & 2 Corinthians, Romans, 1 Thessalonians, Philippians, and Philemon. For over 150 years, both Christian and secular scholars have agreed that these letters were authentically written by the Apostle Paul.

This includes scholars like:

  • Bart Ehrman, an agnostic and New Testament critic, who writes:
    “There is no doubt that Paul wrote Galatians, Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, 1 Thessalonians, Philippians, and Philemon.”
    (Forged: Writing in the Name of God, p. 112)
  • Richard Carrier, an atheist and vocal mythicist, who says:
    “The seven letters generally agreed upon as authentic… are sufficient to reconstruct the basic outline of Paul’s theology and missionary activity.”
    (On the Historicity of Jesus, p. 510)

So what’s so important about these seven letters?

They Are the Earliest Christian Writings

These letters were written before any of the four Gospels—between 48 and 61 AD, during Paul’s active ministry. They offer us the oldest surviving descriptions of Jesus, the earliest theological explanations of his death and resurrection, and references to traditions already circulating among the first Christian communities.

Galatians Contains a 17-Year Timeline

One of the most important letters—Galatians—includes Paul’s autobiographical testimony. In chapters 1 and 2, he describes events spanning at least 17 years, including his own conversion, early preaching, and eventual meeting with Peter and James, the brother of Jesus.

When you line up Paul’s dates with the widely accepted crucifixion date of 30 AD, Paul’s conversion likely happened between 31 and 33 AD—that is, within 1 to 3 years of Jesus’ death.

This makes Paul not only a first-generation Christian, but someone who was contemporaneous with Jesus’ earliest followers, directly connected to the events and people we read about in the Gospels.

Paul Already Knew and Quoted Jesus’ Teachings

Even though Paul wrote before the Gospels were compiled, his letters contain direct echoes of Jesus’ teachings, including:

  • The Lord’s Supper (1 Corinthians 11:23–25) “This is My body… This cup is the new covenant in My blood…”
    (cf. Matthew 26:26–28; Mark 14:22–24; Luke 22:19–20)
  • On divorce (1 Corinthians 7:10–11) “Now to the married I command, yet not I but the Lord…”
    (cf. Mark 10:11–12; Luke 16:18)
  • On ministry support (1 Corinthians 9:14) “Even so the Lord has commanded that those who preach the gospel should live from the gospel.”
    (cf. Luke 10:7)

This is solid evidence that Jesus’ teachings were already being preserved and passed along in oral form within just a few years of his death.

He Also Quotes Early Creeds and Hymns

Paul didn’t invent Christian doctrine from scratch—he inherited creeds and confessions that predate his writings. For example:

  • The Resurrection Creed (1 Corinthians 15:3–7): “Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures… he was buried… he was raised on the third day… and appeared to Peter, then to the Twelve…”
    Scholars widely agree this creed originated within 3–5 years after Jesus’ death, making it the earliest known Christian confession.
  • The Christ Hymn (Philippians 2:6–11):
    A poetic passage describing Jesus’ divine nature, incarnation, death, and exaltation: “He humbled Himself… even to the death of the cross. Therefore God also has highly exalted Him…”
    Scholars believe this hymn predates Paul and was likely sung or recited by early believers before the Gospels were written.

These creeds show that Christian theology didn’t evolve slowly over centuries—it was rich, reverent, and centered on the risen Christ from the very beginning.

Why This Matters

When we read the seven undisputed letters of Paul, we’re not peering through layers of centuries-old church tradition. We’re reading first-generation testimony—from someone who was personally transformed by the very movement he once tried to destroy.

And when even critics of Christianity agree that these letters are genuine, that tells us something profound: these writings are a shared historical foundation, offering common ground for skeptics, seekers, and believers alike.