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

August 11, 2026October 2, 2026 / Jason Conrad / Leave a comment

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

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

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

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

We do not need to begin that way.

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

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

Galatians
First Thessalonians
First Corinthians
Second Corinthians
Romans
Philippians
Philemon

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

That gives us a place to begin together.

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

Why These Seven Letters?

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

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

Their approximate dates are:

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

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

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

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

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

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

These Letters Were Not Protected from Criticism

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

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

Galatians
First Corinthians
Second Corinthians
Romans

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

He wrote:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Then the criticism became even more radical.

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

Willem Christiaan van Manen summarized their conclusion:

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

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

The movement of the debate is important.

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

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

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

What Have Critics Tried to Explain Away?

The most serious challenges have generally taken four forms.

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

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

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

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

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

But exposing complexity is not the same as disproving authorship.

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

Possibility alone is not an explanation.

The Letters Appear Too Early to Be Second-Century Creations

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

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

The author tells the Corinthians:

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

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

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

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

First Corinthians 1:12

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

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

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

Polycarp, Letter to the Philippians 3.2, early second century

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Letters Fit the World of the First Christian Generation

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

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

Paul writes:

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

Galatians 1:18-19

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

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

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

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

The Letters Behave Like Unfinished Correspondence

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

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

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

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

First Corinthians 1:14-16

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

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

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

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

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

Complicated Transmission Does Not Eliminate Paul

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

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

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

First Corinthians 5:9

Second Corinthians refers to another painful letter:

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

Second Corinthians 2:4

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

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

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

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

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

Computer Analysis Did Not Produce a Replacement

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

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

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

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

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

Why Scholarly Agreement Matters, and Why It Is Not Enough

Historical truth is not established by counting votes.

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

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

Bart Ehrman summarizes the present situation:

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

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

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

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

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

What the Skeptic Should Concede

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

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

It requires something more limited.

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

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

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

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

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

What the Christian Gains

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

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

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

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

Galatians would remain. First Corinthians would remain.

Paul’s visit with Cephas and James would remain:

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

Galatians 1:18-19

The resurrection tradition would remain:

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

First Corinthians 15:3-5

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

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

Conclusion: The Evidence We Must Explain

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

More than many Christians or skeptics realize.

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

August 19, 2025October 2, 2026 / 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

Group	Roman View	Legal Status
Jews	Ancient superstition	Tolerated (licita)
Christians	New superstition	Unlawful (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:

Christians could no longer claim Jewish exemptions.
As a superstitio nova, Christianity was inherently unlawful.
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.

How the 7 Letters Show an Unbroken Continuation of Persecution Since Jesus’ Crucifixion

June 21, 2025October 2, 2026 / Jason Conrad / Leave a comment

Was persecution in the early church just a myth? Some modern scholars say yes—but Paul’s seven undisputed letters tell a different story. In this post, we explore how persecution began not with Nero or later emperors, but with Jesus himself—and continued through Paul’s ministry and the churches he wrote to. Long before it was empire-wide, suffering was already the daily reality for early Christians.

Was Early Christian Persecution Exaggerated?

Some modern scholars argue that early Christian persecution wasn’t as serious as we’ve been led to believe.

Candida Moss, in her book The Myth of Persecution (2013), claims the early church exaggerated stories of suffering. She argues that persecution wasn’t common, wasn’t organized, and was often the result of Christians acting in socially disruptive ways. The title alone—The Myth of Persecution—signals her aim to minimize its significance.

Bart Ehrman, in The Triumph of Christianity (2018), similarly states that persecution before Nero was “occasional and local,” not a deliberate campaign against Christians simply for believing in Jesus. In his view, Christians were targeted for offending social norms, not for their faith itself.

But what these arguments often miss is that Christian persecution didn’t have to be empire-wide to be devastating. Early churches were fragile—small house gatherings with no legal protection. If one believer was imprisoned or beaten, the effect rippled through the whole community.

So yes, the threat was localized. But the fear was universal.

What It Meant to Live Under the Threat

Imagine you’re a Christian in Thessalonica or Corinth around AD 50.

You’re not breaking any Roman laws—at least not explicitly—but you no longer join in idol feasts, you refuse to honor Caesar as divine, and you don’t sacrifice to the gods of your city. People notice.

Your friends grow distant. Your employer stops calling. Your family worries you’re joining a cult. And then someone files a complaint. Suddenly, your name is known, and you’re vulnerable.

You live with the constant reality that you could be the next to suffer. No law needs to change for persecution to come—just a neighbor’s suspicion or a local leader’s frustration.

This is the emotional context of Paul’s letters: not paranoia, but preparation. Believers were called to stand firm, because the risk was real.

Who Was Doing the Persecuting?

Persecution of Christians didn’t begin with Paul. It began with Jesus himself.

His crucifixion was the result of a coordinated effort between Jewish religious leaders and Roman civil authority—a pattern that continued after his death.

Paul admits openly that he was once one of the primary persecutors of Christians:

“You have heard of my former conduct in Judaism, how I persecuted the church of God beyond measure and tried to destroy it.”
(Galatians 1:13, NKJV)

And he acknowledges that the same communities who killed Jesus were now attacking his followers:

“You also suffered the same things from your own countrymen, just as they did from the Judeans, who killed both the Lord Jesus and their own prophets, and have persecuted us…”
(1 Thessalonians 2:14–15, NKJV)

In the earliest phase of persecution—from the 30s to the 50s AD—it was primarily Jewish opposition, often in coordination with local Roman authorities, that brought suffering upon Christians. Paul himself was chased out of cities, beaten, and imprisoned by local powers. We do not see formal Roman policy until Nero in the 60s AD.

Nero’s persecution was a turning point. Christians, not Jews, were blamed for the fire of Rome. It marked the first time Roman authorities officially recognized Christians as distinct from Judaism—and treated them as a group worthy of punishment.

That precedent shaped the next 200 years of Christian life under Rome.

What Paul’s Seven Letters Say

The strongest evidence for early persecution doesn’t come from later legends or Christian historians. It comes from the earliest Christian writings we have: the seven undisputed letters of Paul, written between AD 48 and 60.

Let’s look at two verses from each letter—one about Paul’s own suffering, and one about suffering in the churches.

1 Thessalonians

Paul’s suffering:

“We were bold in our God to speak to you the gospel of God in much conflict.” (1 Thess. 2:2)

Church’s suffering:

“You… received the word in much affliction… For you also suffered the same things from your own countrymen.” (1 Thess. 1:6, 2:14)

Galatians

Paul’s suffering:

“I bear in my body the marks of the Lord Jesus.” (Gal. 6:17)

Church’s suffering:

“Have you suffered so many things in vain—if indeed it was in vain?” (Gal. 3:4)

Philippians (written from prison)

Paul’s suffering:

“I am in chains for Christ.” (Phil. 1:13)

Church’s suffering:

“To you it has been granted… not only to believe in Him, but also to suffer for His sake.” (Phil. 1:29)

1 Corinthians

Paul’s suffering:

“We are fools for Christ’s sake… being persecuted, we endure.” (1 Cor. 4:10–12)

Church’s suffering:

“If one member suffers, all suffer together.” (1 Cor. 12:26)

2 Corinthians

Paul’s suffering:

“From the Jews five times I received forty stripes minus one… once I was stoned… in perils often…” (2 Cor. 11:24–26)

Church’s suffering:

“As you are partakers of the sufferings, so also you will partake of the consolation.” (2 Cor. 1:7)

Romans

Paul’s suffering:

“We are accounted as sheep for the slaughter.” (Rom. 8:36)

Church’s suffering:

“If indeed we suffer with Him, that we may also be glorified together.” (Rom. 8:17)

Philemon

Paul’s suffering:

“Paul, a prisoner of Christ Jesus…” (Philemon 1)

Church’s solidarity:

“Though I am in chains… I appeal to you…” (Philemon 9–10)

What This Means for Us

These aren’t fictions. They’re not later legends.

Paul’s letters—written before the Gospels, before Nero, before any systematic Roman policy—show that suffering was already baked into the Christian experience. From the very start, to follow Christ was to risk opposition.

And Paul never wavers. He doesn’t tell churches to soften their message or flee their towns. He tells them to endure. To rejoice. To carry in their bodies the dying of Christ, that his life might be revealed in them.

Conclusion: A Legacy of Suffering

So was early persecution a myth?

The seven letters of Paul say otherwise.

They show a pattern of unbroken hostility from Jesus’ crucifixion to Paul’s chains.
The sources are early. The testimony is consistent. The cost was real.

Christianity was not born in comfort.
It was born in conflict.
And its first witnesses—like Paul—never expected it to be easy.

They expected it to be worth it.