paul-the-apostle

Hatred of the Human Race: Rome’s First Verdict on Christianity

/ Jason Conrad / Leave a comment

When Claudius ruled the Roman Empire from AD 41 to 54, the Christian movement was still young. His reign, while not free from hostility, created an unusual window in which the church could grow rapidly across the empire. Claudius’ policies toward Jews — and Christians who were still seen as part of Judaism — meant the faith could spread along the empire’s roads, through its cities, and into its synagogues with relatively less interference from the imperial government.

But this didn’t mean the first Christians were safe. In Judea, Herod Agrippa I executed James the son of Zebedee and imprisoned Peter. Claudius himself expelled Jews from Rome — an act that affected Jewish Christians as well. Persecution was still real, but it was often local and sporadic.

Under Nero, who reigned from AD 54 to 68, everything changed. In the aftermath of the Great Fire of Rome in AD 64, Christians were no longer treated as just another branch of Judaism. For the first time, they were publicly named, legally separated from the Jewish community, and branded as a dangerous new superstition.

During Nero’s reign, Paul wrote several of his most significant letters — 2 Corinthians, Romans, Philippians, and Philemon. In them, he repeatedly testifies to Christian suffering, urging endurance and faithfulness in the face of mounting hostility. These were not abstract warnings. Paul himself was on the road to Rome, knowing he would one day stand before the emperor’s judgment seat — and, by all early accounts, be executed for the gospel he preached.

The Great Fire of Rome and the First Imperial Persecution (AD 64)

In July AD 64, a massive fire swept through Rome. Ancient sources disagree on whether Nero was responsible, but the rumor persisted. To end it, he found a scapegoat.

Tacitus, Annals 15.44 (Loeb Translation)

“To suppress the rumor, Nero fabricated scapegoats and punished with every refinement the notoriously depraved Christians (as they were popularly called). Their originator, Christ, had been executed in Tiberius’ reign by the procurator of Judea, Pontius Pilatus.

Checked for a moment, this pernicious superstition again broke out—not only in Judea, the home of the disease, but even in Rome, where all things horrible or shameful in the world collect and find a vogue.

First, those who confessed were arrested; then, on their information, a vast multitude was convicted, not so much on the charge of arson as for hatred of the human race.

Their deaths were made farcical. Dressed in wild animal skins, they were torn to pieces by dogs, or crucified, or made into torches to be ignited after dark as substitutes for daylight.

Nero provided his gardens for the spectacle, and exhibited displays in the Circus, at which he mingled with the crowd—dressed as a charioteer or mounted on a chariot.

Hence, in spite of a guilt which had earned the most exemplary punishment, there arose a sentiment of pity, due to the impression that they were being sacrificed not for the welfare of the state but to the ferocity of a single man.”
—Tacitus, Annals 15.44, Loeb Classical Library

What Did “Hatred of the Human Race” Mean?

To Roman ears, this charge meant Christians refused the social glue of Roman life.

  • They would not sacrifice to the gods for the welfare of the empire.
  • They avoided festivals, temples, and gladiatorial games.
  • They proclaimed divine judgment on the world, which Romans heard as contempt for humanity itself.

Christians believed they were called to love their neighbors, but their refusal to share in Rome’s civic religion was taken as proof that they despised mankind.

Suetonius, Life of Nero 16.2 (Loeb Translation)

“Punishments were also inflicted on the Christians, a sect professing a new and mischievous religious belief.”

Cassius Dio (via Zonaras, Loeb-based paraphrase)

“Nero was the first to punish the Christians, though they were guilty of no crime. Some were torn by dogs, others crucified, and others burned alive to serve as lamps at night.
The spectacle was held in Nero’s gardens. He mingled with the crowd in a charioteer’s garb. Pity arose, for it was evident they were being put to death not for the public good, but to gratify the cruelty of a single man.”

Why Christians, Not Jews, Were Targeted

Until Nero, Christians often shared in the legal protection Rome afforded to Judaism — a tolerated “ancient superstition.” But after the fire, Nero treated Christianity as a separate, unauthorized cult.

“Punishments were also inflicted on the Christians, a sect professing a new and mischievous religious belief.”
—Suetonius, Nero 16.2

“Checked for a moment, this pernicious superstition again broke out — not only in Judea, the home of the disease, but even in Rome…”
—Tacitus, Annals 15.44

Rome’s Respect for Ancient Religions but Suspicion of New Ones

“Whatever is novel in religion is forbidden; but whatever is ancient is respected — even if it be based on error.”
—Tacitus, Histories 5.5, Loeb

“Religious belief exerts enormous power over the minds of men… Ancient religions win tolerance through their antiquity; new ones are looked on with suspicion, particularly when they refuse to worship the Roman gods.”
—Pliny the Elder, Natural History 30.11, Loeb

GroupRoman ViewLegal Status
JewsAncient superstitionTolerated (licita)
ChristiansNew superstitionUnlawful (illicita)

Modern Skepticism vs. Ancient Testimony

Candida Moss, The Myth of Persecution (2013):

“The earliest Christians were not targeted for being Christians… They were targeted for their refusal to obey the laws of the land.”

Bart Ehrman, The Triumph of Christianity (2018):

“Christians were persecuted not because of their religion per se, but because they were perceived to be antisocial and subversive to Roman unity.”

But the Roman historians describe something different.

  • Tacitus: a pernicious superstition spreading from Judea to Rome.
  • Suetonius: a new and mischievous religious belief.
  • Cassius Dio: Christians guilty of “no crime,” yet publicly humiliated and killed.
  • Pliny the Elder: Rome tolerated ancient faiths, but new ones were inherently suspicious.

This was not simply scapegoating. It was the classification of Christianity as an unlawful religion — a precedent that would echo for decades.

Nero’s Persecution Compared with the Stoics

It is true that Nero also executed Stoic philosophers like Seneca and Thrasea Paetus. But there is a difference. The Stoics were influential individuals silenced for their independence. The Christians were rounded up in “a vast multitude” and condemned as a whole movement.

Nero’s persecution was not just the removal of a few dissidents. It was the criminalization of a religion.

The Precedent That Shaped the Next Half-Century

By defining Christians as a separate, new superstition, Nero set a precedent every emperor from Nero to Trajan would inherit:

  1. Christians could no longer claim Jewish exemptions.
  2. As a superstitio nova, Christianity was inherently unlawful.
  3. Governors had freedom to punish Christians whenever accusations arose.

This principle explains why, fifty years later, the governor Pliny the Younger could interrogate and execute Christians simply for the name — and why Emperor Trajan confirmed that policy. What began in Nero’s gardens would be codified in imperial correspondence.

The Martyrdom of Peter and Paul

Early Christian sources agree that Peter and Paul died in Nero’s persecution.

  • Dionysius of Corinth: “Peter and Paul… were martyred at the same time.”
  • Tertullian: “After having cruelly put to death Peter and Paul…”
  • Eusebius: “Paul was beheaded in Rome itself, and Peter likewise was crucified under Nero.”
  • Acts of Paul (late 2nd c.): Paul told Nero, “You will stand before the judgment seat of God,” before being beheaded outside the city.

Other Traditional Martyrs Under Nero

  • Linus – Peter’s successor; said to be martyred in Rome (Liber Pontificalis).
  • Mark the Evangelist – tradition places his death in Alexandria during Nero’s reign.
  • Trophimus and Eutychus – companions of Paul; later traditions connect them to Nero’s persecution.
  • Processus and Martinian – Roman guards who converted and were executed (Acts of Peter and Paul).

Conclusion

Under Nero (AD 54–68), Christianity became an illegal religion — not because it was violent, but because it was new, exclusive, and refused Rome’s gods.

  • Roman historians confirm the scale and cruelty of the persecution.
  • Christian writers affirm that Peter and Paul were among the victims.
  • Roman law explains why Christians were targeted apart from Jews.

The precedent Nero set would outlive him. For the next half-century, Christians lived under the same vulnerability — a reality spelled out with chilling clarity in the letters of Pliny and Trajan, which we will explore in a future post.

Claudius, the Jews, and the Window for the Gospel (AD 41–54)

/ Jason Conrad / Leave a comment

Introduction

When Caligula was assassinated in AD 41, the empire teetered between chaos and reform.
The Senate debated restoring the Republic, but the Praetorian Guard made their choice: they found Claudius, uncle to Caligula, hiding behind a curtain in the palace, and proclaimed him emperor.
He would reign from AD 41 to 54 — thirteen years that gave the early church unprecedented space to grow.

Claudius was no outsider to Rome’s first imperial family.
He was the step-grandson of Augustus through Augustus’ marriage to Livia Drusilla, the grandmother who raised him.
This Julio-Claudian lineage tied Claudius directly to the imperial tradition of Julius Caesar and Augustus — and under his rule, he would restore and reaffirm the protections for the Jews that both men had supported.

Roman historians describe Claudius as bookish, awkward, and underestimated — the butt of jokes in his own family. Yet when given the throne, he proved unexpectedly competent, bringing stability after years of volatility.

For the Jewish people — and for the Christians still seen as part of Judaism — this meant an abrupt reversal from Caligula’s threats.
Claudius restored and reaffirmed the privileges and protections for Jewish communities that had first been granted by Julius Caesar and confirmed by Augustus.
This meant legal recognition of their right to keep the Sabbath, follow their food laws, send offerings to the Temple, and live according to their ancestral customs.

It was during these years that Paul completed all three missionary journeys and wrote his earliest letters, as recorded in the book of Acts.

Christians Were Still Seen as Jews

In the early 40s AD, Rome still made no distinction between Jews and Christians.
The followers of Jesus worshiped in synagogues and kept many Jewish customs.
Their legal standing was tied to that of the Jewish people.

That meant that Claudius’ actions to protect Jewish rights automatically extended to Christians as well.
The legal umbrella was still intact.

Claudius’ Letter to the Alexandrians

Shortly after taking power, Claudius addressed a violent conflict between Jews and Greeks in Alexandria — the same city where Philo had once pleaded with Caligula for relief.
Claudius sent a decree restoring order and reaffirming Jewish rights.

Josephus, Antiquities 19.278–285 (c. AD 93):
“Tiberius Claudius Caesar Augustus Germanicus, imperator, consul, tribune of the people, to the city of the Alexandrians, greeting.

I have long been aware of the troubles which have existed in your city between the Jewish and the Greek inhabitants, and of the recent outbreaks that occurred under my predecessor Gaius. Now, having become emperor, and desiring to settle these disturbances, I issue this decree.

I therefore command the Greeks and the Jews who live in the same city not to engage in further unrest or unlawful behavior toward one another.

The Jews shall not again be expelled from Alexandria, nor shall their rights be diminished, but they are to continue to inhabit the city in accordance with their ancestral customs.

They are not to bring in or admit Jews from Syria or Egypt as new settlers in the city, but only those who already reside there may continue in peace.

I strictly forbid them to hold public meetings except in accordance with their ancestral customs and only in those places officially assigned to them — meaning their synagogues.

Furthermore, I order that no one shall insult them or interfere with their observance of the Sabbath, or any of their other traditional rites and customs.

They are to enjoy all the rights and privileges they formerly had under Augustus and the other emperors.

If anyone violates this order — Jew or Greek — I shall take vengeance on them as a disturber of the peace, no matter what nation they belong to.”

This was one of Claudius’ very first acts as emperor — a clear break from Caligula’s religious aggression and a deliberate restoration of the policies of Julius Caesar and Augustus.

Claudius’ General Decree to the Provinces

Claudius didn’t stop with Alexandria. He issued a broader decree to all the provinces, making protection of Jewish customs an imperial policy.

Josephus, Antiquities 19.286–291:
“Tiberius Claudius Caesar Augustus Germanicus, imperator and consul for the second time, issues the following decree:

Since I am fully persuaded that the Jewish people — not only in Alexandria but throughout the entire world — have increased in numbers and are living with prosperity,

and since they have continually demonstrated loyalty to us and to our ancestors, especially in matters of religion and public conduct,

I judge it right that they should be permitted to continue in observance of their ancestral customs without interference.

Therefore I order that the same privileges granted to them from the time of Augustus — and after him by my father Drusus and my brother Germanicus — be fully maintained in all the cities under Roman rule.

I command that no one shall molest them or compel them to abandon their customs, particularly concerning:
— the keeping of the Sabbath,
— their food laws,
— and their sending of offerings to the Temple in Jerusalem.

In these matters, the Jews are not to be harassed or charged with offenses, so long as they continue in their loyalty and orderly conduct.”

This decree explicitly names Augustus as the source of these rights — and Augustus had been continuing what Julius Caesar had already put in place decades earlier. Claudius was not inventing new privileges; he was reinforcing a long-standing imperial policy that gave Jews, and by extension early Christians, freedom to practice their faith.

The Rome Expulsion

Despite his protections for Jewish customs, Claudius would not tolerate unrest in the capital.
Around AD 49 or 50, disturbances among the Jewish population in Rome led to a sweeping expulsion.

Acts 18:2:
“There he met a Jew named Aquila, a native of Pontus, who had recently come from Italy with his wife Priscilla, because Claudius had ordered all the Jews to leave Rome.”

Suetonius, Life of Claudius 25.4 (c. AD 110–130):
“Since the Jews constantly made disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus, he expelled them from Rome.”

“Chrestus” is almost certainly a misunderstanding of “Christus” — Christ. The unrest likely involved disputes within the Jewish community over Jesus as the Messiah.

Among those expelled were Aquila and Priscilla, who were already Christians when Paul met them in Corinth. Acts never records their conversion; they immediately appear as trusted co-laborers in ministry.

Christianity had, by this point, already reached Rome before Paul ever visited. Paul confirms this in Romans 1:8, writing, “Your faith is being reported all over the world.” The church in Rome likely began through Jewish believers who had been in Jerusalem at Pentecost (Acts 2:10) and carried the gospel back home.

What Was Happening in the Church?

Claudius’ reign was one of the most formative in early church history:

  • James the brother of John was martyred c. AD 44
    • Emperor: Claudius
    • Official: Herod Agrippa I (Acts 12:1–2)
  • Peter was arrested, likely to be executed next (Acts 12:3–11)
  • Paul’s First Missionary Journey: AD 46–48 (Acts 13–14)
  • The Jerusalem Council: AD 49 (Acts 15)
  • Paul’s Second Missionary Journey: AD 49–52 (Acts 15:36–18:22)
  • Paul tried before Gallio, Roman proconsul of Achaia (Acts 18:12–17)
  • Paul’s Third Missionary Journey: AD 52–54 (Acts 18:23–21:16)

Paul’s Letters During Claudius’ Reign

Several of Paul’s letters were written under Claudius:

  • Galatians – c. AD 48–49, likely between the first and second journeys, addressing the push to require Gentile Christians to keep the Mosaic Law.
  • 1 Thessalonians – c. AD 50–51, written from Corinth during the second journey to encourage a persecuted young church.
  • 1 Corinthians – c. AD 53–54, written from Ephesus during the third journey to address division, immorality, and doctrinal confusion.

Persecution Continued Under Claudius

Although Claudius’ reign provided legal protection through Judaism’s recognized status, Paul’s own letters from this period show that persecution was an ongoing expectation and reality for the church.

In Galatians, Paul warns against compromising the gospel under pressure from those demanding Gentile believers keep the law (Galatians 1:6–10; 4:29).
In 1 Thessalonians, he commends the believers for standing firm in the face of suffering: “You suffered from your own people the same things those churches of God suffered from the Jews” (1 Thessalonians 2:14).
In 1 Corinthians, he speaks of apostles being “condemned to die in the arena” and “made a spectacle to the whole universe” (1 Corinthians 4:9).

This persecution came from multiple directions —

  • Jewish authorities, as seen in Paul’s repeated synagogue expulsions (Acts 13:45–50; 14:2–6; 17:5–9).
  • Local Gentile opposition, stirred up by economic or religious concerns (Acts 16:19–24; 19:23–41).
  • And from rulers like Herod Agrippa I, who executed James the brother of John and imprisoned Peter in Jerusalem during Claudius’ reign (Acts 12:1–3).

Even in this window of stability, Paul and the churches he planted understood that following Christ meant sharing in his sufferings — a reality they embraced alongside the rapid spread of the gospel.

The Crucial Window: Caligula to Nero

Between Caligula’s threats to desecrate the Temple and Nero’s fire in AD 64 came a rare 13-year window of stability under Claudius.
In that time:

  • Paul completed all three missionary journeys.
  • The gospel spread across Syria, Galatia, Macedonia, and Achaia.
  • The first New Testament letters were written.
  • The church began to define the gospel for both Jew and Gentile.
  • Christianity had already reached Rome before Paul arrived, and the church there was strong enough for him to say their faith was known “all over the world” (Romans 1:8).

Had Claudius ruled like Caligula — or had Nero come to power earlier — the story could have been very different.

Conclusion

Claudius died in AD 54, likely poisoned by his wife Agrippina.
Her son, Nero, became emperor.
And under Nero, the fire would start.

But for just over a decade, the church had room to grow — protected under the legal status of Judaism, traveling freely across the empire, planting congregations, writing the Scriptures that would anchor the Christian faith, and enduring persecution with the expectation that it was part of following Christ.

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.

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.

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.