roman-history

Marcus Aurelius and the Martyrs: Stoic Resignation vs. Christian Resurrection

/ Jason Conrad / Leave a comment

When Antoninus Pius died in AD 161, the throne passed to his adopted son Marcus Aurelius Antoninus. For the first eight years he ruled jointly with Lucius Verus; after Verus’ death in 169, Marcus reigned alone until 180.

Marcus is remembered as the philosopher-emperor. His Meditations, written in Greek during military campaigns, are one of the most famous works of Stoic philosophy. They counsel calm acceptance of death and resignation to the fleeting nature of life.

Yet in these same decades, Christians were being persecuted across the empire. They too left writings — apologies, theological treatises, and martyrdom accounts. These voices allow us to set Stoicism and Christianity side by side in the years of plague and persecution.

Marcus Aurelius on Life and Death

In the Meditations, written in the 170s during the wars on the Danube frontier, Marcus constantly reminded himself of life’s brevity:

“Of man’s life, his time is a point, his substance a flux, his sense dull, the fabric of his body corruptible, his soul spinning round, his fortune dark, his fame uncertain. Brief is all that is of the body, a river and a vapour; and life is a warfare and a sojourning in a strange land; and after-fame is oblivion.” (2.17, Loeb)

“Consider how swiftly all things vanish — the bodies themselves into the universe, and the memories of them into eternity. What is the nature of all objects of sense, and especially those which attract with pleasure or affright with pain or are blazed abroad by vanity — how cheap they are, how despicable, sordid, perishable, and dead.” (9.3, Loeb)

He urged himself not to despise death but to welcome it, since dissolution is as natural as birth or growth:

“Do not despise death, but welcome it, since nature wills it like all else. For dissolution is one of the processes of nature, just as youth and age, growth and maturity, teeth and beard and grey hairs and procreation and pregnancy and childbirth, and all the other natural operations which the seasons of life bring. To be not only not resisted but welcomed by the wise man is no less fitting.” (9.3, Loeb)

For Marcus, death was inevitable dissolution into the cosmos; memory itself was destined to fade into nothing. Stoicism offered dignity and calm acceptance, but no hope beyond the grave.

Justin Martyr: Death Cannot Harm Us

At the very same time in Rome, the Christian philosopher Justin Martyr was writing his apologies to the emperor. In his First Apology, written about 155–157, Justin described how Christians worshiped:

“And on the day called Sunday, all who live in cities or in the country gather together to one place, and the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as time permits. Then, when the reader has ceased, the president verbally instructs, and exhorts to the imitation of these good things. Then we all rise together and pray, and, as we said before, when our prayer is ended, bread and wine and water are brought, and the president in like manner offers prayers and thanksgivings, according to his ability, and the people assent, saying Amen; and there is a distribution to each, and a sharing with those who are absent, and to those who are not present a portion is sent by the deacons. And they who are well to do, and willing, give what each thinks fit; and what is collected is deposited with the president, who succors the orphans and widows and those who, through sickness or any other cause, are in want, and those who are in bonds and the strangers sojourning among us, and in a word takes care of all who are in need. But Sunday is the day on which we all hold our common assembly, because it is the first day on which God, having wrought a change in the darkness and matter, made the world; and Jesus Christ our Savior on the same day rose from the dead. For He was crucified on the day before that of Saturn (Saturday); and on the day after that of Saturn, which is the day of the Sun, having appeared to His apostles and disciples, He taught them these things, which we have submitted to you also for your consideration.” (First Apology 67, Loeb)

While Marcus mused on life’s futility, Christians were meeting every week to proclaim eternal life through Christ’s resurrection and to share the Eucharist as a pledge of incorruption, with their offerings supporting the poor, the sick, the imprisoned, and strangers.

In the same work, Justin explained why Christians did not fear persecution:

“We are accused of being atheists. But we are not atheists, since we worship the Creator of the universe… Him we reasonably worship, having learned that He is the Son of the true God Himself, and holding Him in the second place, and the prophetic Spirit in the third… For though beheaded, crucified, thrown to wild beasts, in chains and in fire, we do not renounce our confession; but the more such things happen, the more others in turn become believers.” (First Apology 13, Loeb)

In his Dialogue with Trypho, written in the 160s, Justin emphasized that the soul does not perish with the body:

“For not as common opinion holds, the soul dies with the body. We say that souls survive, and that those who have lived virtuously shall dwell in a better place, while those who have done wickedly shall suffer a worse fate, and that the unjust are punished with everlasting fire.” (Dialogue 5, Loeb)

And in his Second Apology, probably written after Marcus came to power, Justin summed it up in one line:

“You can kill us, but cannot hurt us.” (Second Apology 2, Loeb)

The Martyrdom of Justin

Justin’s philosophy became confession, and his confession became death. In about 165 he and six companions were brought before the prefect Junius Rusticus in Rome. The Acts of Justin’s Martyrdom, preserved in Greek, record the trial.

Rusticus commanded them to sacrifice:

“Approach and sacrifice, all of you, to the gods.”

Justin replied:

“No one in his right mind gives up piety for impiety.” (ch. 5–6, Loeb)

Rusticus pressed him:

“If you are scourged and beheaded, do you believe you will go up to heaven?”

Justin answered:

“I hope that if I endure these things I shall have His gifts. For I know that all who live piously in Christ shall have abiding grace even to the end of the whole world.” (ch. 6, Loeb)

The prefect pronounced sentence:

“Let those who have refused to sacrifice to the gods and to obey the command of the emperor be scourged and led away to suffer the penalty of capital punishment according to the laws.”

And so, the account concludes:

“The holy martyrs, glorifying God, went out to the customary place, and were beheaded, and completed their testimony in confessing the Savior.” (ch. 8, Loeb)

Justin was condemned not for crimes but for refusing to renounce the name of Christ. And this was nothing new. The same policy had been in place since Nero, carried on by every emperor in one form or another.

  • Nero (54–68): After the fire of Rome in AD 64, Nero did something new in Roman history. Unlike any other group, he chose the entire class of people called Christians for punishment. Tacitus says they were convicted “not so much of the crime of firing the city as of hatred of the human race.” Anyone associated with the name was liable to arrest, and an “immense multitude” was executed. Their punishments were grotesque public spectacles: some torn apart by dogs while covered in animal skins, others crucified, others burned alive as torches in Nero’s gardens. This marked a turning point: from then on, Christians carried the deadly liability of the name itself.
  • Vespasian (69–79) and Titus (79–81): Christians in Judea perished in the Jewish War; across the empire, Jewish-practicing Christians bore the fiscus Judaicus, the humiliating tax imposed on all who “lived like Jews.”
  • Domitian (81–96): Remembered by Christians as a new Nero. Dio Cassius says he executed Flavius Clemens for “atheism.” Revelation, likely written in these years, calls Rome “Babylon” and portrays the beast as Nero reborn. For the church, Domitian was Nero come again.
  • Trajan (98–117): His rescript to Pliny set the empire-wide rule: Christians were not to be sought out, but if accused and refusing to sacrifice, they must be punished — “for the name itself.”
  • Hadrian (117–138): Required due process but left the liability of the name untouched.
  • Antoninus Pius (138–161): Reaffirmed the same: Christians could be prosecuted “merely as such.”
  • Marcus Aurelius (161–180): And under Marcus the pattern continued — Justin executed in Rome, Blandina and Pothinus tortured in Gaul, Speratus and companions condemned in Africa.

From Nero to Marcus, the empire’s stance was consistent: Christians were punished not for ordinary crimes but for the name of Christ.

Athenagoras of Athens: Resurrection vs. Dissolution

Written around AD 177 and addressed to Emperor Marcus Aurelius and his son Commodus, Athenagoras’ Plea for the Christians (also known as the Embassy for the Christians) is one of the most eloquent defenses of early Christian faith. A philosopher by training, Athenagoras used the very language of Greek reason to defend the Christians against the charges of atheism, immorality, and political disloyalty. He explains the Christian understanding of God, the Trinity, resurrection, and the endurance of persecution with remarkable clarity.

From Plea for the Christians (Loeb)

“Who, then, would not be astonished to hear men who speak of God the Father, and of God the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, and who declare both their power in union and their distinction in order, called atheists? For we are not atheists, since we acknowledge one God, uncreated, eternal, invisible, impassible, incomprehensible, illimitable, who is apprehended by mind and reason alone, who is surrounded by light and beauty, and spirit and power unspeakable.

We are persuaded that when we are removed from this present life we shall live another life better than the present one, heavenly, not earthly, where we shall abide near God and with God, free from all change or suffering in the soul, and not as flesh but as spirits; or, if we shall again take flesh, we shall have it no longer subject to corruption, but incorruptible.

For as we acknowledge a God, and a Son His Logos, and a Holy Spirit, united in power—the Father, the Son, and the Spirit, because the Son is the Mind, Reason, and Wisdom of the Father, and the Spirit is the effluence as light from fire—so we declare that there is a God, and that the universe came into being by His will.

And though we are beheaded, crucified, thrown to wild beasts, chains, fire, and all kinds of torture, we do not renounce our confession; but the more such things happen, the more others in turn become believers, who observe the extraordinary patience of those who suffer and reflect that it is impossible for them to be living in wickedness and pleasure. For when they see women and boys and young girls preserving the purity of their bodies for so long a time under tortures, and others who had been weak in body becoming strong through the name of Christ, they are moved to understand that there is something divine in this teaching.”
— Athenagoras, Plea for the Christians 10–12, 18 (Loeb Classical Library)

Key Insights

Contrast with Stoicism: While Marcus’ Stoicism accepted death as dissolution, Athenagoras presents death as transformation — a passage into the incorruptible life of God.

Addressed directly to Marcus Aurelius: Athenagoras wrote from Athens to the same emperor who condemned Justin, appealing for reason and justice.

First philosophical articulation of the Trinity: He names “God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit” and explains their unity and distinction.

Immortality and incorruption: Christians believe that after death, they live near God — not dissolving into the cosmos, but sharing in incorruptible life.

Persecution as proof of truth: Athenagoras insists that the courage, purity, and endurance of Christian martyrs demonstrate that their faith is divine.

Theophilus of Antioch: Immortality and Resurrection

Around AD 180, Theophilus, bishop of Antioch, wrote To Autolycus — a three-book defense of the Christian faith addressed to a learned pagan friend. His work is especially important for two reasons:

  1. It contains the earliest known Christian use of the word “Trinity.”
  2. It presents the Christian doctrine of creation, resurrection, and incorruptibility in contrast to Greek philosophy.

Writing from one of the great intellectual centers of the empire, Theophilus appeals both to reason and to Scripture, insisting that faith in the one God — revealed through His Word and Spirit — is the true path to eternal life.

From To Autolycus (Loeb)

“God, then, having His own Word internal within His own bowels, begat Him, emitting Him along with His own Wisdom before all things. He had this Word as a helper in the things that were created by Him, and by Him He made all things. He is called the beginning, because He rules and is Lord of all created things, fashioned by Him.

For God will raise up your flesh immortal with your soul; and then, having become immortal, you shall see the immortal, if you now believe in Him. Then you shall know that you have spoken unjustly against Him. For if you disbelieve, you shall be convinced hereafter, when you are tormented eternally with the wicked.

In like manner also the three days which were before the luminaries are types of the Trinity: of God, and His Word, and His Wisdom. But to us who bear the sign, God has given eternal life. For he who has believed and has been born again has been delivered from death and shall not see corruption.”
— Theophilus of Antioch, To Autolycus 2.10; 1.14; 2.15 (Loeb Classical Library)

Key Insights

Connection to Marcus’ world: Writing at the end of Marcus Aurelius’ reign, Theophilus gives voice to a Christianity fully confident in both reason and revelation — a faith that promises incorruptible life amid an empire obsessed with decay and death.

Earliest known use of “Trinity”: Theophilus is the first Christian writer to use the term explicitly — describing “God, His Word, and His Wisdom.”

Creation through the Word: Theophilus presents the Logos (Word) as God’s agent in creation, echoing both Genesis and John 1.

Promise of bodily resurrection: Unlike Stoicism, which saw the soul dissolve back into nature, Theophilus proclaims the raising of the flesh “immortal with the soul.”

Moral urgency of faith: Belief in God’s Word leads to immortality; unbelief results in corruption and loss.

Melito of Sardis: Christ’s Victory

During the reign of Marcus Aurelius, Melito, bishop of Sardis in Asia Minor, wrote one of the most beautiful early Christian homilies ever preserved — the On Pascha (Peri Pascha). Preached during the annual Paschal celebration, it interprets Christ’s death and resurrection as the true fulfillment of the Jewish Passover.

Melito was deeply versed in both the Scriptures of Israel and the language of Greek rhetoric. His sermon combines poetic intensity with precise theology: Christ is both God and Man, the Creator who entered His own creation, suffered, and destroyed death. In the face of Roman Stoicism’s resignation to mortality, Melito proclaimed a faith that saw the cross as cosmic victory and the resurrection as the end of corruption.

From On Pascha (Loeb)

“He who hung the earth in place is hanged. He who fixed the heavens in place is fixed in place. He who made all things fast is made fast on a tree. The Master has been insulted; God has been murdered; the King of Israel has been destroyed by the right hand of Israel… He who raised the dead is himself put to death. He who has power over the dead is himself made subject to corruption. But he is lifted up on a tree, and nailed thereon, not for any evil he had done, but for the sins of the world.” (96)

“This is He who made the heaven and the earth, and in the beginning created man, who was proclaimed through the law and the prophets, who became human through a virgin, who was hanged upon a tree, who was buried in the earth, who was raised from the dead, who ascended to the heights of heaven, who sits at the right hand of the Father, who has the power to save all things, through whom the Father acted from the beginning and forever.” (105)

“This is the Passover of our salvation. This is He who patiently endured many things in many people: This is He who was murdered in Abel, and bound as a sacrifice in Isaac, and exiled in Jacob, and sold in Joseph, and exposed in Moses, and slaughtered in the lamb, and hunted down in David, and dishonored in the prophets. This is He that was made human of a virgin, that was hanged upon a tree, that was buried in the earth, that was raised from the dead, that was taken up to the heights of heaven.” (69–71)
— Melito of Sardis, On Pascha 69–71, 96, 105 (Loeb Classical Library)

Key Insights

A Message to Rome: Preached while Marcus Aurelius ruled, Melito’s words directly contradict Stoic despair: God has entered history, conquered corruption, and opened immortality to humankind.

Christ as Creator and Redeemer: Melito proclaims that the very One who made heaven and earth is the One who was crucified — uniting creation and redemption in a single act.

The Cross as Victory: Where Stoicism saw death as natural dissolution, Melito sees it as the moment when death itself was destroyed.

The True Passover: Christ fulfills every Old-Testament figure — Abel, Isaac, Joseph, Moses, David — revealing the unity of Scripture in Him.

Poetry and Power: The sermon’s rhythm and parallelism show how early Christian preaching rivaled classical oratory yet centered on the suffering God.

The Martyrs of Lyons and Vienne (177)

In AD 177, while Marcus Aurelius was still emperor, a violent persecution erupted in the Gallic cities of Lugdunum (modern Lyons) and Vienne. The empire was ravaged by plague, and popular suspicion fell on the Christians, whom many blamed for angering the gods. The hostility grew into mob violence, imprisonment, and finally public executions in the amphitheater.

The account was written by the local churches and sent to their brothers in Asia and Phrygia; Eusebius later preserved it in his Church History (Book 5, chapters 1–3). It is one of the earliest detailed descriptions of martyrdom in the western provinces of the Roman Empire and vividly records the endurance of ordinary believers—men, women, the elderly, and slaves—who suffered joyfully for the name of Christ.

From Eusebius, Church History 5.1–3 (Loeb)

“From the very beginning they endured nobly the injuries heaped upon them by the populace, clamors, blows, dragging, despoiling, stonings, imprisonments, and all things which the enraged mob are wont to inflict upon their adversaries and enemies.

They were shut up in the darkest and most loathsome parts of the prison, stretching their feet into the stocks as far as the fifth hole, and left to suffer in this condition. Yet though suffering grievously, they were sustained by great joy through the love of Christ.

Through her [the slave girl Blandina] Christ showed that things which appear mean and obscure and despicable to men are with God of great glory. For while we all feared lest, through her bodily weakness, she should not be able to make a bold confession, she was filled with such power that the insensible and the weak by nature became mighty through the fellowship of Christ. She was hung upon a stake and offered as food to the wild beasts; but as none of them touched her, she was taken down and thrown again into prison, preserved for another contest.

Pothinus, the bishop of Lyons, being more than ninety years old and very infirm, was dragged before the judgment-seat, beaten unmercifully, and after a few days died in prison.

They were all finally sacrificed, and instead of one wreath of victory which the Lord has given, they received many; for they were victorious in contests of many kinds, and endured many trials, and made many glorious confessions.”
— Eusebius, Church History 5.1.5, 14, 17, 29, 55 (Loeb Classical Library)

Key Insights

Legacy: The courage of these Gallic believers inspired churches from Asia Minor to North Africa. It shows how far Christianity had spread—and how deeply its followers trusted in resurrection over resignation.

A Letter from the Churches: This account was written by eyewitnesses—ordinary believers, not historians—making it one of the most authentic voices from the 2nd-century church.

Suffering Across Social Lines: The martyrs included nobles, slaves, and clergy. Blandina, a young slave girl, became the central figure of courage; Pothinus, a bishop over ninety years old, died from his wounds in prison.

Joy in Suffering: The letter repeatedly says the prisoners were filled “with great joy through the love of Christ.” Their faith turned the instruments of torture into testimonies of hope.

Public Spectacle: Their deaths were staged in the amphitheater, just as Nero had done a century earlier in Rome—proof that the name itself still carried a death sentence.

Contrast with Marcus’ Philosophy: The emperor wrote that life is vapor and fame oblivion; his subjects in Lyons believed their suffering crowned them with eternal victory.

The Scillitan Martyrs (180)

In July of AD 180, only months after Marcus Aurelius’ death, twelve Christians from the small North African town of Scillium (near modern Tunis) were brought before the proconsul Saturninus at Carthage.

Their brief hearing—preserved in Latin as the Acts of the Scillitan Martyrs—is the earliest surviving Christian document in Latin, a legal transcript of their words before the Roman governor. The Christians were offered mercy if they would swear by the emperor’s genius and return to “Roman custom.” Instead, they calmly confessed their allegiance to Christ and accepted execution.

From the Acts of the Scillitan Martyrs (Loeb)

Saturninus the proconsul said: “You can win the indulgence of our lord the Emperor if you return to sound mind.”

Speratus, the spokesman for the group, replied: “We have never done wrong, we have not lent ourselves to wickedness, we have never spoken ill; but when we have received ill treatment, we have given thanks, for we pay heed to our Emperor.”

Saturninus said: “We too are religious, and our religion is simple: we swear by the genius of our lord the Emperor, and pray for his welfare, as you also ought to do.”

Speratus said: “If you will listen to me quietly, I will speak the mystery of simplicity.”

Saturninus said: “I will not listen to you when you speak evil of our sacred rites; but rather swear by the genius of our lord the Emperor.”

Speratus said: “I do not recognize the empire of this world; rather I serve that God whom no man has seen, nor can see with these eyes. I have not stolen; but whenever I buy anything I pay the tax, because I recognize my Lord, the King of kings and Ruler of all nations.”

The others with him said: “We too are Christians.”

Saturninus said: “Do you wish time to consider?”

They said: “In such a just cause there is no deliberation.”

Saturninus read from the tablet: “Speratus, Nartzalus, Cittinus, Donata, Secunda, and Vestia, having confessed that they live as Christians, and refusing, after opportunity given them, to return to Roman custom, are hereby condemned to be executed with the sword.”

And they all said: “Thanks be to God.”
— Acts of the Scillitan Martyrs (Loeb Classical Library)

Key Insights

A calm defiance of Stoic fatalism: Stoicism accepted death with indifference; the Scillitan believers accepted it with thanksgiving, certain that life eternal had already begun.

Earliest Latin Christian text: The Acts are the first known Christian writing in Latin, showing that the faith had already taken root far beyond its Greek-speaking heartlands.

Execution “for the name”: The martyrs are charged with no crime but refusal to renounce the Christian name or sacrifice to the emperor’s genius.

Civic loyalty without idolatry: Speratus insists that Christians are not rebels: they pay taxes and pray for the emperor—but cannot worship him.

Quiet confidence: Their composure is remarkable. They require no “time to consider” and meet the death sentence with “Thanks be to God.”

Empire-wide continuity: Their trial in North Africa mirrors Justin’s in Rome and the martyrs’ in Lyons—proof that by the late 2nd century, persecution for the Christian name extended from the capital to the provinces.

Stoicism and Christianity Contrasted

  • Marcus Aurelius (Stoicism, 170s): Life is fleeting vapor. Death is dissolution. All things vanish. After-fame is oblivion. The best that can be done is to endure with dignity and accept fate calmly.
  • Christians under Marcus (Justin, Athenagoras, Theophilus, Melito, the martyrs of Lyons and Vienne, and the Scillitan Martyrs, 155–180): Life is fleeting, but Christ has conquered death. The soul endures. The body will rise. Judgment is certain. Incorruption is promised. Suffering is not meaningless fate but victory with Christ. Death itself becomes thanksgiving and triumph.

This was not new in Marcus’ time. From Nero to Domitian to Trajan, Hadrian, Antoninus Pius, and now Marcus, Christians faced the same charge: death for the name.

Conclusion

The reign of Marcus Aurelius brought plague without and persecution within. The emperor’s Stoic meditations gave him dignity to accept dissolution. The Christians’ writings and martyrdoms gave them courage to proclaim resurrection.

From Nero to Marcus, the story was the same: Christians were executed not for ordinary crimes but for the name. The philosopher-emperor wrote that life is vapor; the martyrs declared that life is eternal in Christ.

Plague may ravage. Governors may condemn. Emperors may command. But the Christians of Marcus’ reign — and every reign since Nero — bore witness that Christ has overcome death, and in Him incorruption and eternal life have already begun.

The Church’s Voice in an Emperor’s “Peaceful” Reign

/ Jason Conrad / Leave a comment

Antoninus Pius (AD 138–161) is remembered as one of Rome’s “Five Good Emperors.” His reign lasted twenty-three years and was marked by peace, stability, and prosperity. He earned the title Pius because of his devotion: to his adoptive father Hadrian, whose memory he defended; to Roman religion, which he honored scrupulously; and to his family. Ancient writers portray him as the model of dutifulness and justice.

But beneath this outward calm, Christianity continued to grow. For Christians, Antoninus’ reign was not simply peaceful. It was a season of both intellectual flourishing and enduring danger. Some of the earliest apologies — reasoned defenses of Christianity addressed to emperors — come from this time, as well as one of the most famous martyrdom accounts of the ancient church.

Antoninus and His Reputation

The Historia Augusta reports:

“He was called Pius for the following reason: When the Senate wanted to annul Hadrian’s decrees, he persuaded them not to do so. He supported the father of his wife Faustina, who had been accused, and obtained his pardon. He always treated his stepmother with respect and honor. And he always sacrificed to the gods, showing reverence in every way.” (Life of Antoninus Pius, 6).

This reputation for reverence and stability carried into later Roman memory. He was remembered as a benevolent emperor who avoided war, strengthened the law, and ensured financial security.

Justin Martyr: Pleading Before the Emperors

During Antoninus’ reign, the Christian philosopher Justin Martyr composed his First Apology (c. 155), addressed to Antoninus Pius, Marcus Aurelius, Lucius Verus, and the Roman Senate. Why multiple emperors? Because Antoninus had adopted Marcus and Lucius as his heirs. By addressing all of them, Justin was not only appealing to the reigning emperor but also to those who would succeed him. He wanted Christianity to be judged fairly at the highest level of Rome.

Justin’s central plea was simple: stop condemning Christians for their name alone.

“Reason requires that those who are accused should not be condemned without a trial, nor hated on account of a name. For what is the accusation? That we are called Christians. This is no crime. The charge is only that we bear a name. If any is found guilty of evil, let him be punished as an evildoer; but not on account of the name, if he is found to be guiltless.” (First Apology 4, Loeb).

He exposed the absurdity of condemning someone merely for a title:

“For from a name neither praise nor punishment could reasonably spring, unless something excellent or base in action can be shown about it. Those who accuse us of atheism, because we do not worship the same gods as you, charge us falsely; for we worship the Maker of this universe, declaring that He has no need of streams of blood and libations and incense.” (First Apology 6, Loeb).

Justin also wanted to show that Christians lived morally upright lives:

“We who once delighted in fornication, now embrace chastity alone. We who used magical arts dedicate ourselves to the good and unbegotten God. We who loved gain above all things now bring what we have into a common stock, and share with every needy one. We who hated and destroyed one another, and on account of our different customs would not live with men of a different tribe, now, since the coming of Christ, live familiarly with them, and pray for our enemies.” (First Apology 14, Loeb).

Describing Christian Worship

Before Justin, the Roman governor Pliny the Younger had reported what former Christians told him under interrogation (ca. AD 112 under Trajan):

“They declared that the sum of their fault or error had been that they were accustomed to meet on a fixed day before dawn, and to sing responsively a hymn to Christ as to a god, and to bind themselves by an oath, not to some crime, but not to commit theft, robbery, or adultery, not to break their word, and not to refuse to return a deposit when asked for it. After this it was their custom to depart, and then to assemble again to partake of food — but ordinary and innocent food.” (Pliny, Letters 10.96, Loeb).

But Justin’s First Apology is the first time a Christian himself described worship directly to the Roman emperors. His account is fuller, and deliberately meant to explain Christian practice in detail:

“On the day called Sunday, all who live in cities or in the country gather together in one place, and the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as time permits. Then, when the reader has finished, the president verbally instructs, and exhorts to the imitation of these good things. Then we all rise together and pray, and, as we said before, when our prayer is ended, bread and wine and water are brought, and the president in like manner offers prayers and thanksgivings, according to his ability, and the people assent, saying Amen; and there is a distribution to each, and a sharing of that over which thanks have been given, and to those who are absent a portion is sent by the deacons.” (First Apology 67, Loeb).

And on the Eucharist:

“This food is called among us the Eucharist, of which no one is allowed to partake but the man who believes that the things which we teach are true, and who has been washed with the washing for the remission of sins, and unto regeneration, and who is so living as Christ has enjoined. For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Savior, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh.” (First Apology 66, Loeb).

Justin left no doubt: Christians worshiped Christ as God, and their meal was not symbolic but sacred — the body and blood of Jesus.

In his Second Apology, Justin gave examples of how Christians were still executed for the name alone:

“When a certain woman, who had been made a disciple of Christ, remained with her husband for a time and tried to persuade him to live in chastity, and when he continued in licentiousness, she left him. Then, when she was about to be married to another, her former husband accused her of being a Christian. She presented a petition to delay the case until she could arrange her affairs, but her instructor in the faith was arrested and punished merely for being called a Christian.” (Second Apology 2, Loeb).

Even under Antoninus, Christians died for their confession of Christ.

Polycarp: Faithful Unto Death

At roughly the same time, Polycarp — bishop of Smyrna and disciple of the apostle John — was brought before the Roman proconsul.

When pressed to deny Christ, he famously replied:

“Eighty-six years I have served him, and he has done me no wrong. How then can I blaspheme my King who saved me?” (Martyrdom of Polycarp 9, Loeb).

The proconsul urged him to swear by Caesar:

“Swear by the fortune of Caesar; repent, and say, Away with the atheists!’ But Polycarp, with solemn countenance, looked upon all the lawless heathen in the arena, and waving his hand toward them, groaned, and looking up to heaven, said: ‘Away with the atheists.’” (Martyrdom of Polycarp 10, Loeb).

As they bound him for the fire, he prayed:

“O Lord God Almighty, Father of Thy beloved and blessed Son Jesus Christ, by whom we have received the knowledge of Thee, the God of angels and powers and every creature, and of all the righteous who live before Thee, I bless Thee that Thou hast counted me worthy of this day and hour, that I may share, among the number of the martyrs, in the cup of Thy Christ, for resurrection to eternal life both of soul and body, in the incorruptibility of the Holy Spirit.” (Martyrdom of Polycarp 14, Loeb).

Polycarp’s death under Antoninus shows that Rome still demanded worship of Caesar — and Christians who refused still died.

The Epistle to Diognetus: Citizens of Another World

From the same period comes the anonymous Epistle to Diognetus. It begins with a fictional inquirer raising the questions that many pagans asked about Christians:

“Since I see, most excellent Diognetus, that you are exceedingly anxious to learn the religion of the Christians, and are searching into it with the most careful and exact inquiry — as to what God they trust, and how they worship Him, that they all despise the world and disregard death, and neither account the acknowledged gods of the Greeks to be gods, nor observe the superstition of the Jews; and what kind of love they have for one another, and why this new race or practice has entered into life now and not before — I welcome this zeal of yours, and I beg of God, who enables both us to speak and you to hear, that it may be granted to both of us to profit by what we learn.” (Epistle to Diognetus 1, Loeb).

After dismissing both idol worship and Jewish ritual sacrifices as unworthy of God, the author explains that Christianity did not come from human speculation, but from revelation:

“When then you have freed yourself from all these things, and laid aside the error of the common talk, and are rid of the deception of the gods, and no longer suppose, like the Jews, that God has need of sacrifices — then shall you learn what is the true mystery of the Christian faith. For neither by curiosity nor by busy inquiry have we learned it, nor did we discover it through the art of men, as in some empty talk; but it has been handed down to us from the very Word of God Himself, who was sent from heaven by God to men.” (Epistle to Diognetus 4, Loeb).

And then comes one of the most moving descriptions of the Christian life in the entire second century — a vision of paradox, resilience, and heavenly citizenship:

“For Christians are not distinguished from the rest of mankind by country or by speech or by customs. For they do not dwell somewhere in their own cities, nor do they use some different language, nor practice a peculiar kind of life. This teaching of theirs has not been discovered by the thought and reflection of inquisitive men, nor do they champion any human doctrine, as some do. But while they dwell in both Greek and barbarian cities, as each has fallen to their lot, and follow the native customs in clothing and food and the other matters of daily life, yet the condition of citizenship which they exhibit is wonderful, and admittedly strange. They live in their own countries, but only as sojourners; they share all things as citizens, and suffer all things as foreigners. Every foreign country is a fatherland to them, and every fatherland is foreign.

They marry like all other men, and they beget children; but they do not cast away their offspring. They have their meals in common, but not their wives. They are found in the flesh, yet they do not live after the flesh. They spend their days upon earth, but their citizenship is in heaven. They obey the established laws, and they surpass the laws in their own lives. They love all men, and are persecuted by all. They are not known, and yet they are condemned. They are put to death, and yet they are quickened into life. They are poor, yet make many rich; they lack all things, and yet abound in all things. They are dishonored, and yet are glorified in their dishonor. They are spoken evil of, and yet are justified. They are reviled, and bless; they are insulted, and repay the insult with honor. They do good, yet are punished as evildoers. Being punished, they rejoice as though they were thereby quickened into life. The Jews make war upon them as foreigners, and the Greeks persecute them; and those who hate them cannot state the cause of their enmity.” (Epistle to Diognetus 5–6, Loeb).

This is how Christians under Antoninus saw themselves: rooted in Roman cities, yet belonging to another world; hated and persecuted, yet bringing life to others; dishonored, yet glorified; punished, yet rejoicing.

Hegesippus: Guarding the Apostolic Tradition

During Antoninus’ reign, the writer Hegesippus began preserving Christian memory in his five books of Memoirs. Sadly the work is lost, but fragments survive in Eusebius:

  • On the uniformity of doctrine:

“And the Church of Corinth continued in the true faith until Primus was bishop in Corinth; and I conversed with them on my voyage to Rome, and we were refreshed together in the true doctrine. And being in Rome I made a succession up to Anicetus, whose deacon was Eleutherus. And after Anicetus, Soter succeeded, and after him Eleutherus. In every succession and in every city things are as the Law and the Prophets and the Lord proclaim.” (Hist. Eccl. 4.22.1–3, Loeb).

  • On the family of Jesus (“desposyni”):

“There still survived of the kindred of the Lord the grandsons of Jude, who had been called his brother according to the flesh. … Domitian asked them how much property they owned; they said they had only thirty-nine plethra of land, and showed their calloused hands from farming. Asked about Christ and his kingdom, they replied that it was not earthly but heavenly and angelic, to appear at the end of the world. At this Domitian let them go, and they became leaders of the churches, both as witnesses and as of the Lord’s family.” (Hist. Eccl. 3.19–20, Loeb).

  • On James the Just:

“James, the brother of the Lord, succeeded to the government of the Church in conjunction with the apostles. … His knees became hard like a camel’s because of his constant worship, kneeling and asking forgiveness for the people. … They threw him down from the temple, stoned him, and finally a fuller’s club struck his head. Thus he bore witness, and they buried him by the temple, and his monument still remains.” (Hist. Eccl. 2.23, Loeb, citing Hegesippus).

  • On heresies after the apostles:

“Until the times of Trajan the Church continued a pure and uncorrupted virgin. But when the sacred band of apostles had closed their lives, and that generation passed away, then the conspiracy of godless error arose through the fraud of false teachers.” (Hist. Eccl. 4.22.4–7, Loeb).

Hegesippus stands as one of the earliest church historians, traveling through cities, checking successions of bishops, and insisting on continuity with the apostles.

The Rescript of Antoninus — and Why It Fails

Eusebius also preserves a decree attributed to Antoninus, which seems to restrain mob violence against Christians:

“If, therefore, the provincials are able to make a clear case against the Christians in court, let them bring charges. But it is unlawful to persecute them merely for the name. If anyone continues to harass them, let the one accused be released, even though he be found to be a Christian, and let the informer be punished.” (Church History IV.13, Loeb).

At first glance, this sounds as if Antoninus protected Christians. But the evidence of the time says otherwise.

  • Justin begged that Christians not be condemned for the name alone — which shows they were.
  • Polycarp was executed for refusing to deny Christ.
  • Justin’s Second Apology explicitly describes Christians punished “merely for being called a Christian.”

For these reasons, most historians conclude that Eusebius was wrong in this instance — either quoting a spurious decree or idealizing Antoninus. Whatever Antoninus may have written, Christians still died for their confession of Christ.

Conclusion

Antoninus Pius is remembered by Roman historians as the calmest, most peaceful emperor of the second century. But for Christians, his reign looked different.

  • Justin Martyr wrote eloquent defenses of Christianity, describing their moral life and Sunday worship — but still had to plead that Christians not be killed for the name alone.
  • Polycarp was executed, proving that even in a so-called peaceful reign, death was the cost of faith.
  • The Epistle to Diognetus portrayed Christians as citizens of heaven, foreigners in every land.
  • Hegesippus preserved the memory of apostolic succession and the purity of the early church.
  • And Eusebius’ rosy decree about Antoninus was almost certainly wrong.

Antoninus’ reign demonstrates a crucial point: even when Rome was at peace, Christians were not safe. Their very identity was enough to condemn them. Yet it was in this climate that Christianity’s first great apologists wrote, its first great martyrdom was recorded, and its distinct self-understanding emerged.

The empire might call Antoninus Pius — dutiful and devout. But for Christians, true piety meant loyalty to a greater King, even unto death.

When Hadrian Erased Jerusalem and Christians Spoke Up

/ Jason Conrad / Leave a comment

Hadrian (AD 117–138) succeeded Trajan not as a conqueror but as a reformer. He traveled widely, reorganized law and military, and adorned the empire with monuments. Yet his vision of a unified Greco-Roman order brought him into conflict with the Jews.

Dio Cassius (c. AD 211–230) remembered him as tireless:

“He was laborious and vigilant, inasmuch as he neglected nothing, and often prevented many things from going wrong by being on the spot, and he would not accept excuses for any neglect of duty.”
— Roman History 69.6 (Loeb)

But Hadrian’s measures in Judea—especially banning circumcision, renaming Jerusalem Aelia Capitolina, and building a temple to Jupiter on the Temple Mount—ignited a war that would devastate the Jewish nation.

The Provocation: Circumcision and Aelia Capitolina

Dio Cassius records:

“At Jerusalem he founded a city in place of the one which had been razed to the ground, naming it Aelia Capitolina, and on the site of the temple of the god he raised a new temple to Jupiter. This brought on a war of no slight importance nor of brief duration. For the Jews deemed it intolerable that foreign races should be settled in their city and foreign religious rites planted there.”
— Roman History 69.12.1–2 (Loeb)

He adds:

“At this time the Jews began war because they were forbidden to mutilate their genitals. For Hadrian ordered them to desist from this practice, and thus attempted to abolish their national customs.”
— Roman History 69.12 (Loeb)

While Hadrian was still nearby, the Jews prepared in secret:

“They did not dare to fight in the open, but they occupied advantageous positions in the country and strengthened them with mines and walls, so that they might have places of refuge whenever they should be hard pressed, and might meet together under ground unseen; and they pierced these subterranean passages from above at intervals to let in air and light.”
— Roman History 69.12.3 (Loeb)

The Bar Kokhba Revolt (AD 132–135)

Once Hadrian departed, open revolt broke out under Simon bar Kosiba (Bar Kokhba), hailed by Rabbi Akiva as Messiah.

“Soon, however, all Judaea was in a ferment, and the Jews everywhere were showing signs of disturbance, gathering together, and giving evidence of great hostility to the Romans, partly by secret and partly by overt acts.”
— Roman History 69.13.1 (Loeb)

Rome responded with overwhelming force.

“Fifty of their most important outposts and nine hundred and eighty-five of their most famous villages were razed to the ground. Five hundred and eighty thousand men were slain in the various raids and battles, and the number of those that perished by famine, disease and fire was past finding out. Thus nearly the whole of Judaea was made desolate.”
— Roman History 69.14 (Loeb, Xiphilinus epitome)

Bethar: The Last Fortress of Bar Kokhba

Bethar (Betar) was the final stronghold of the revolt. Located about six miles southwest of Jerusalem, it sat high on a ridge above the Valley of Sorek.

  • Strategic Position: Its steep hills made it naturally defensible, and Jewish forces fortified it heavily.
  • Headquarters: Bar Kokhba is said to have commanded from Bethar in the final stage.
  • The Siege: Roman forces encircled the city. Archaeological surveys have found burn layers, ballista stones, and siege trenches.
  • Symbolism: Rabbinic tradition later remembered Bethar as falling on the 9th of Av, the same date both the First and Second Temples were destroyed.

Bethar became the symbol of the revolt’s futility—the last fortress where Jewish resistance was extinguished.

Rabbinic Memory of Bethar

The Jerusalem Talmud (Ta’anit 4:5–6) preserves the devastation:

“The blood flowed until horses were submerged in it up to their nostrils… And the slain of Bethar were not permitted burial until a later emperor gave permission.”

This is not the voice of a Roman chronicler but the lament of a people for whom even death did not bring rest. Bethar was remembered not merely as a defeat, but as a massacre.

Archaeology of Catastrophe

  • Bethar: burn layers, Roman siege trenches, and ballista stones confirm the destruction.
  • Caves of Refuge: in Nahal Hever and the Cave of Letters, archaeologists found skeletons, sandals, knives, jars of food, and scrolls.
  • Babatha Archive: 35 legal documents of a Jewish widow, sealed in leather and buried with her remains. Her last dated record is from August 132 CE—the very month the revolt broke out. After that, silence.
  • Letters of Bar Kokhba: papyrus and wooden tablets signed “Shim‘on ben Kosiba, Prince of Israel,” ordering supplies, threatening deserters, and requesting palm branches for Sukkot.

This was a war remembered in blood, texts, and ash.

Hadrian’s Rescript on Christians

While crushing the Jews, Hadrian issued a rescript on Christians. Preserved by Eusebius:

“If, therefore, the provincials can sustain by evidence their charges against the Christians, let them prosecute the cases, but not by mere clamour and outcry. For it is much more just, if anyone desires to make accusations, that you yourself should pass judgment.”
— Ecclesiastical History 4.9 (Loeb)

It offered no protection against charges of impiety—but it restrained mob violence.

Christian Voices in Hadrian’s Reign

This same period saw a burst of Christian literature. These writings are the first direct responses to imperial scrutiny.

Quadratus of Athens (c. 125)

Eusebius introduces him:

“After Trajan had reigned for nineteen years, Aelius Hadrian became his successor in the empire. To him Quadratus addressed a discourse, as an apology for our religion, because certain wicked men were attempting to trouble our people.”
— Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 4.3.1 (Loeb)

Quadratus’ surviving words:

“But the works of our Saviour were always present, for they were genuine: those who were healed, those who were raised from the dead, who were seen not only when they were healed and when they were raised, but were also present continually; not only while the Saviour was living, but also for a considerable time after His departure; and indeed some of them have survived even to our own time.”
— Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 4.3.2 (Loeb)

Why this claim is plausible:

  • Quadratus was writing c. AD 125, less than 100 years after Jesus’ ministry (c. AD 30).
  • People who had been children or teenagers when healed by Jesus could still be alive in their 80s or 90s. Rare, but possible in antiquity (Polycarp, for example, lived to 86).
  • More importantly, many were still alive who had personally known eyewitnesses — family, neighbors, or members of the earliest churches.

Commentary:
Quadratus is not arguing that Christianity is ancient like Judaism. He is arguing that it is true because it is still within memory: the miracles of Jesus left people alive long enough for their authenticity to be checked. His defense to Hadrian is: Christianity is not myth or invention — it happened in history, and its effects are still visible in living witnesses.

Aristides of Athens (c. 125–140)

Dedication:

“To the Emperor Caesar Titus Hadrianus Antoninus Augustus Pius, from Marcianus Aristides, a philosopher of Athens.

I, O King, by the inspiration of God, have come to this conclusion, that the universe and all that is in it is moved by the power of another… Wherefore I… have no wish to worship any other than God, the living and true, and I have searched carefully into all the races of men and tested them, and this is what I have found.”
— Aristides, Apology 1 (Loeb Syriac)

Survey of humanity (chs. II–XIV):

  • Barbarians: idol worshippers.
  • Greeks: immoral gods.
  • Egyptians: animal worship.
  • Jews: monotheists, but clinging to angels, sabbaths, and rituals.

Christians (full text, chs. XV–XVI):

XV.
“But the Christians, O King, reckon the beginning of their religion from Jesus Christ, who is named the Son of God most High; and it is said that God came down from heaven, and from a Hebrew virgin took and clad Himself with flesh; and that the Son of God lived in a daughter of man. This is taught in the gospel, as it is called, which a little while ago was preached among them; and you also, if you will read therein, may perceive the power which belongs to it.
This Jesus, then, was born of the race of the Hebrews; and He had twelve disciples in order that a certain dispensation of His might be fulfilled. He was pierced by the Jews, and He died and was buried; and they say that after three days He rose and ascended to heaven.
Thereupon these twelve disciples went forth into the known parts of the world, and taught concerning His greatness with all humility and sobriety. And those then who still observe the righteousness which was enjoined by their preaching are called Christians.
And these are they who more than all the nations of the earth have found the truth. For they acknowledge God, the Creator and Maker of all things, in the only-begotten Son and in the Holy Spirit; and besides Him they worship no other God. They have the commandments of the Lord Jesus Christ Himself graven upon their hearts; and they keep them, looking for the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come.
They do not commit adultery or fornication; they do not bear false witness; they do not covet what belongs to others; they honor father and mother; they do good to those who are their neighbors. And they judge uprightly. They do not worship idols in the likeness of man. Whatever they would not wish others to do to them, they do not practice themselves. They do not eat of the food offered to idols, for they are pure. They comfort their oppressors and make them their friends; they do good to their enemies. Their women are pure as virgins, and their daughters are modest. Their men abstain from all unlawful union and from all uncleanness, in the hope of a recompense to come in another world.”

XVI.
“They love one another. They do not turn away a widow, and they rescue the orphan. He who has gives ungrudgingly to him who has not. If they see a stranger, they take him under their roof, and they rejoice over him as over a real brother. If any one among them is poor and needy, and they have no spare food, they fast two or three days, that they may supply the needy with their necessary food.
They observe scrupulously the commandments of their Messiah; they live honestly and soberly, as the Lord their God ordered them. They give thanks to Him every hour, for all meat and drink, and other blessings.
And if any righteous man among them passes away, they rejoice and thank God, and escort his body with songs and thanksgiving as if he were setting out from one place to another.
And when a child has been born to one of them, they give thanks to God; and if it chance to die in childhood, they praise God mightily, as for one who has passed through the world without sins.
But if any one of them be a man of wealth, and he sees that one of their number is in want, he provides for the needy without boasting. And if they see a stranger, they take him under their roof, and they rejoice over him as over a brother; for they do not call them brethren after the flesh, but brethren after the Spirit and in God.
And whenever one of their poor passes away from the world, each of them, according to his ability, gives heed to him and carefully sees to his burial.
Such is the law of the Christians, O King, and such is their manner of life.”
— Aristides, Apology 15–16 (Loeb Syriac text)

Commentary:
Notice how Aristides even tells Hadrian: “and you also, if you will read [the Gospel], may perceive the power which belongs to it.” Aristides assumes the emperor could obtain and read a Christian Gospel. This shows both the confidence of Christians in their Scriptures and the public availability of the Gospel writings by Hadrian’s reign.

Epistle of Barnabas (c. 120–130)

On the covenant:

“Take heed to yourselves, and be not like some, heaping up your sins and saying that the covenant is both theirs and ours. It is ours: but in this way did they finally lose it, after Moses had already received it.”
— Barnabas 4.6–7 (Loeb)

On circumcision:

“He has abolished these things, that the new law of our Lord Jesus Christ, free from the yoke of constraint, might have its own offering not made by human hands… So we are they whom he brought into the new law… no longer bound by circumcision.”
— Barnabas 9.4–7 (Loeb)

On the temple:

“Now we say that their wretched men set their hope on the building, as though it were the house of God, and not on their God who created them. But learn how the Lord speaks, abolishing it: ‘Heaven is my throne, and the earth the footstool of my feet. What manner of house will you build for me? says the Lord.’”
— Barnabas 16.1–2 (Loeb)

Commentary:

  • Written at the very moment Hadrian was making Jerusalem into Aelia Capitolina.
  • The letter insists: the true temple is the people of God, not a building or land.
  • Barnabas draws a sharp break with Judaism — aligning with Hadrian’s years when Jewish identity itself was outlawed.

2 Clement (c. 120–140)

On confession and deeds:

“Let us not think it enough to call him Lord; for that will not save us. Not every one that says to me, Lord, Lord, shall be saved, but he that works righteousness. So then, brothers and sisters, let us acknowledge him by our works, by loving one another, by abstaining from slander and envy, by being self-controlled, compassionate, good.”
— 2 Clement 4.2–5 (Loeb)

On perseverance:

“If we do the will of Christ, we shall find rest; but if not, nothing will deliver us from eternal punishment, if we disobey his commandments. The scripture says: If the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the ungodly and the sinner appear? So then, brothers and sisters, let us struggle, knowing that the contest is near and that many things are at stake.”
— 2 Clement 5.4–6 (Loeb)

On endurance in suffering:

“Blessed are they that obey these commands, though they be for a short season afflicted in the world; they shall be gathered into the immortal fruit of the resurrection.”
— 2 Clement 19.3 (Loeb)

Commentary:

  • 2 Clement reflects the atmosphere of Hadrian’s reign: Christians under scrutiny, exhorted to prove their faith by life, not just words.
  • Where Aristides says to Hadrian, “See how we live,” 2 Clement says to the church, “Live so that the world sees.”

Conclusion: Two Stories

Hadrian tried to erase the Jews: banning circumcision, renaming their land, and slaughtering them by the hundreds of thousands.

Christians, already distinct, were forced out of Jerusalem along with the Jews—but the movement itself was not tied to land or temple.

The earliest imperial-facing defenses came in Hadrian’s reign: Quadratus and Aristides, written directly to emperors. Alongside them, Barnabas and 2 Clement spoke to Christian communities in the same decades, sharpening identity and urging moral seriousness.

And the core claim running through them is not philosophical speculation but a simple one: this faith works.

It changes lives.
It makes a people who fast to feed the poor, who rejoice in death, who call strangers their brothers, who endure under trial.

Rome buried cities. But the church carried forward a witness of lives transformed.

Slaves as Deacons, Christians on Trial: The World of Pliny and Trajan

/ Jason Conrad / Leave a comment

Christians had already been singled out under Nero in AD 64, when they were executed as scapegoats for the great fire of Rome. Tacitus explained that this was possible because the movement was already “a pernicious superstition” spreading from Judea to Rome itself.

Under Trajan we find something new: the earliest preserved imperial correspondence about Christians. Around AD 111–113, Pliny the Younger wrote to the emperor, uncertain how to judge these people who seemed to be everywhere in his province. His letter, and Trajan’s reply, provide the first official window into how Rome defined the Christian movement: not for crimes committed, but for stubborn loyalty to Christ.

Pliny’s First Provincial Post

Pliny the Younger had served in Rome as a lawyer, senator, and consul, but in AD 111 Trajan appointed him governor of Bithynia-Pontus in Asia Minor. This was his first post outside Rome, and very early in his service he encountered Christians.

Bithynia-Pontus was no small territory. It stretched across the Black Sea coast of northern Asia Minor, covering about 50,000–80,000 square kilometers — comparable to a modern U.S. state like South Carolina or a country like Ireland. Its population likely numbered one to three million people, scattered across major cities such as Nicomedia (the capital), Nicaea, Amisus, and Sinope, as well as countless villages and rural communities.

It was a wealthy and strategically important province, close to Rome’s troubled eastern frontier. Pliny had been sent there with special imperial authority to repair corruption in the local cities and restore order to provincial finances. He wrote dozens of letters to Trajan on everything from aqueduct projects to fire safety. Among them is this extraordinary letter — the earliest Roman testimony we possess about Christians.

Pliny’s Letter to Trajan (Letters 10.96, Loeb)

“It is my rule, Sir, to refer to you all matters concerning which I am in doubt. For who is better able either to direct my hesitation or to instruct my ignorance? I have never been present at any trials of Christians; therefore I do not know what is the customary subject-matter of investigations and punishments, or how far it is usual to go. Whether pardon is to be granted on repentance, or if a man has once been a Christian it does him no good to have ceased to be one; whether the mere name, apart from atrocious crimes associated with it, or only the crimes which adhere to the name, is to be punished—all this I am in great doubt about.

In the meantime, the course that I have adopted with respect to those who have been brought before me as Christians is as follows: I asked them whether they were Christians. If they admitted it, I repeated the question a second and a third time, with a warning of the punishment awaiting them. If they persisted, I ordered them to be led away for execution; for I could not doubt, whatever it was that they admitted, that stubbornness and unbending obstinacy ought to be punished. There were others similarly afflicted; but, as they were Roman citizens, I decided to send them to Rome.

In the case of those who denied that they were or had been Christians, when they invoked the gods in the words I dictated and offered prayer with incense and wine to your image, which I had ordered to be brought for this purpose together with statues of the gods, and furthermore cursed Christ—none of which things, I am told, those who are really Christians can be forced to do—I thought they ought to be discharged.

Others, who were named by an informer, first said that they were Christians and then denied it; true, they had been of that persuasion, but they had left it, some three years ago, some more, and a few as much as twenty years. All these also worshiped your image and the statues of the gods, and cursed Christ.

They maintained, however, that the sum and substance of their fault or error had been that on a fixed day they were accustomed to meet before daylight and to recite by turns a form of words to Christ as to a god, and that they bound themselves by an oath—not for any crime, but not to commit theft, robbery, or adultery, not to break their word, and not to refuse to return a deposit when called upon to restore it. After this it was their custom to separate, and then meet again to partake of food—but ordinary and harmless food. Even this they said they had ceased to do after the publication of my edict, by which, in accordance with your instructions, I had forbidden associations.

I thought it the more necessary, therefore, to find out what was true from two slaves, whom they call deaconesses, by means of torture. I discovered nothing else but depraved, excessive superstition.

I therefore postponed the investigation and hastened to consult you. The matter seems to me to justify consultation, especially on account of the number of those in danger; for many of every age, every rank, and also of both sexes are already and will be brought into danger. For the contagion of this superstition has spread not only through cities, but also through villages and the countryside; and yet it seems possible to check and cure it. It is certain at least that the temples, which had been almost deserted, have begun to be frequented, and the sacred rites, long suspended, are again being performed, and there is a general demand for the flesh of sacrificial victims, for up till now very few purchasers could be found. From this it may easily be supposed what a multitude of people can be reclaimed, if only room is granted for repentance.”

Trajan’s Reply (Letters 10.97, Loeb)

“You have followed the right course, my dear Secundus, in examining the cases of those who had been denounced to you as Christians; for it is impossible to lay down any general rule which will apply as a fixed standard. They are not to be sought out; if they are brought before you and convicted, they must be punished. With this proviso, however—that if anyone denies that he is a Christian and proves it by worshiping our gods, he is to obtain pardon through repentance, even if he has incurred suspicion in the past.

As for anonymous accusations, they must not be admitted in any proceedings. For that would establish a very bad precedent and is not in keeping with the spirit of our age.”

Commentary on the Exchange

Pliny’s confession, “I have never been present at any trials of Christians,” shows both his inexperience and the fact that trials were already happening elsewhere. Christianity was under continual pressure across the empire, and now the problem landed on his desk.

The chilling reality is revealed in his line about “the mere name ….” To bear the name Christian was itself a death sentence. No crimes were needed. Identity alone was enough.

The procedure Pliny used shows just how brutal this was. He explains, “I asked them whether they were Christians. If they admitted it … I repeated the question a second and a third time … If they persisted, I ordered them to be led away for execution.” Imagine the horror of answering three times, knowing each affirmation sealed your fate.

He explains why: “stubbornness and unbending obstinacy ought to be punished.” His uncle, Pliny the Elder, had written:

Pliny the Elder, Natural History 28.3 (Loeb):
“There is no doubt that obstinacy (pertinacia) in every case is a kind of mental disease; and it is certainly detestable.”

Romans believed stubborn refusal to yield was itself madness. For Christians, refusing to recant was not insanity but faith. For Rome, it was intolerable.

Pliny even notes that apostates could prove themselves by worshiping Trajan’s image, since “none of which things … those who are really Christians can be forced to do.” This shows the fame of Christian commitment: even outsiders knew real Christians would never deny Christ.

He describes their worship: “on a fixed day … to Christ as to a god … by an oath … not to commit theft, robbery, or adultery … and then partake of food—but ordinary and harmless food.” This is the earliest pagan testimony to Christian worship of Jesus as divine.

Pliny adds they ceased such gatherings “after the publication of my edict … I had forbidden associations.” Christianity was caught in Rome’s general ban on private clubs. The suspicion of associations is illustrated vividly in another letter. When the city of Nicomedia asked to form a small fire brigade to deal with frequent blazes, Pliny petitioned Trajan for permission:

Pliny to Trajan (10.33): “The city of Nicomedia has been visited by frequent fires, and its narrow streets and the lack of aqueducts make this danger greater. They beg you to permit them to establish a fire brigade of 150 men. I will see to it that none but firemen are admitted into it. But still, it will be easy to keep them under control.”

Trajan flatly refused:

Trajan’s Reply (10.34a): “You are doubtless aware that societies of this sort have greatly disturbed the peace of the provinces, and particularly of your province. Whatever name we give them, and for whatever purpose they may be formed, they will not fail to degenerate into political clubs. Therefore we must not sanction the existence of such a body. It will be sufficient if private individuals bring help, and slaves too, when a fire breaks out.”

If Trajan would not allow even a fire brigade for public safety, how much less would he permit Christians to form weekly gatherings for worship.

Pliny then reports that he tried to get more information “from two slaves, whom they call deaconesses, by means of torture.” The Latin ancillae makes clear these were slaves. Roman law allowed slaves to be tortured for testimony, while free citizens were usually protected from such treatment.

What is remarkable is not only that slaves were tortured — that was routine — but that these enslaved women held the office of deacon (ministrae), functioning as ministers and leaders in their Christian community. To Rome, they were property; to the church, they were shepherds of the flock.

The Didache, written only a decade or two earlier, had instructed Christians to “appoint for yourselves bishops and deacons worthy of the Lord” (Did. 15). Now Pliny, in a completely different province, confirms the same office. This is the earliest Roman testimony that Christians had recognized offices — and it reveals something astonishing: the church entrusted even slaves, even women, with the role of deacon.

This convergence is remarkable. The Didache exhorted churches to choose deacons for their character; Pliny identifies two women who bore that title. To their fellow believers, they were leaders in worship. To Roman law, they were vulnerable bodies fit for torture. This single line in Pliny’s letter accidentally reveals the radical social reversal inside the Christian movement.

It is important to remember, however, that this is only one governor’s correspondence. Pliny was just one official among some forty provincial governors who administered Rome’s empire under Trajan. Their letters on taxation, roads, temples, and law were constant. It is reasonable to assume that similar exchanges about Christians were being carried on elsewhere, even if those letters have been lost. Trajan’s consistent instructions suggest this was not a one-off ruling, but an imperial policy applied across the empire.

Pliny also reports the movement’s scale: “many of every age, every rank, and also of both sexes … the contagion of this superstition has spread not only through cities, but also through villages and the countryside.” For a province the size of Bithynia-Pontus — with millions of inhabitants across urban and rural settings — this meant Christianity was embedded in every layer of society. He calls it a “contagion” to be “checked and cured,” echoing Tacitus who wrote that Christianity had been “checked for the moment” in Judea, but then broke out again in Rome.

Finally, Pliny admits that “the temples, which had been almost deserted, have begun to be frequented … the sacred rites … again being performed.” Christianity had already drained pagan practice. Only persecution revived it.

Trajan’s reply solidified the pattern: Christians were “not to be sought out; if … convicted, they must be punished.” Apostasy and sacrifice to the gods could secure pardon. Anonymous accusations were disallowed, but the danger remained.

And since this correspondence occurred in AD 111–113, it reflects how Christians had been treated from the beginning of Trajan’s reign in 98. For nearly two decades, the policy had been consistent: tolerated in silence, condemned if confessed.

Christian Voices Under Trajan

Ignatius of Antioch (c. 110–117)

Ignatius, Romans 6 (Loeb):
“Permit me to be an imitator of the passion of my God. If anyone has him within himself, let him consider what I long for and let him sympathize with me, knowing the things which constrain me.”

Ignatius explicitly calls Jesus “my God” and embraces death as imitation of his Lord’s passion.

Ignatius, Ephesians 20 (Loeb):
“Come together in common, one and all without exception in grace, in one faith and in one Jesus Christ … breaking one bread, which is the medicine of immortality, the antidote that we should not die but live forever in Jesus Christ.”

Ignatius shows the same worship Pliny described — but where Pliny saw superstition, Ignatius saw immortality.

Polycarp of Smyrna, Letter to the Philippians (c. 110–115)

Polycarp, Philippians 2 (Loeb):
“Stand firm, therefore, in these things and follow the example of the Lord, being strong and unchangeable in the faith, loving the brotherhood, cherishing one another, joined together in the truth, forestalling one another in the gentleness of the Lord, despising no man.”

Here Polycarp echoes the oath Pliny heard — not to crime, but to virtue.

Polycarp, Philippians 2 (Loeb):
“If we please him in this present world, we shall also receive the world to come, as he has promised us that he will raise us from the dead, and that if we live worthily of him we shall also reign with him, if indeed we have faith.”

Moral living is bound to resurrection hope and the lordship of Christ.

The Didache (c. 100–110)

Didache 1.2 (Loeb):
“The way of life, then, is this: First, you shall love God who made you; second, your neighbor as yourself; and all things whatsoever you would not have done to you, do not do to another.”

This is the oath Pliny summarized — binding oneself to moral life.

Didache 10 (Loeb):
“We give you thanks, holy Father, for your holy name which you caused to tabernacle in our hearts, and for the knowledge and faith and immortality which you made known to us through Jesus your servant. To you be the glory forever.”

Here the Eucharist is described in prayer form, matching Pliny’s “ordinary and harmless food,” but revealing its sacred meaning.

The Shepherd of Hermas (Rome, c. 100–117 for earliest layers)

Hermas, Vision 3.2.4 (Loeb):
“Those who endure cheerfully the things that happen, these are the ones who are blessed. It is they who will inherit life.”

This is the Christian redefinition of “stubbornness”: not madness, but blessedness.

Hermas, Mandate 8.6 (Loeb):
“Keep the commandments of the Lord and you will be approved and enrolled among the number of those who keep his commandments. But if you do any other thing, you will not be saved, nor your children, nor your household, since you have despised the commandments of the Lord.”

Hermas shows the seriousness of moral life, binding salvation to obedience.

Papias of Hierapolis (c. 110–130)

Eusebius, Church History 3.39.3–4 (Loeb):
“I shall not hesitate also to set down for you along with my interpretations whatsoever things I learned with care from the presbyters and stored up in memory, guaranteeing their truth. For I did not, like the multitude, take pleasure in those who spoke much, but in those who taught the truth, nor in those who related strange commandments, but in those who rehearsed the commandments given by the Lord to the faith and proceeding from the truth itself. And if by chance anyone who had been a follower of the presbyters should come my way, I inquired into the words of the presbyters, what Andrew or what Peter said, or what Philip or what Thomas or James or what John or Matthew or any other of the Lord’s disciples; and what Aristion and the presbyter John, the disciples of the Lord, say. For I did not think that what was to be gotten from the books would profit me as much as what came from the living and abiding voice.”

Eusebius, Church History 3.39.15–16 (Loeb):
“And this the presbyter used to say: Mark, having become the interpreter of Peter, wrote down accurately whatever he remembered of the things said and done by the Lord, but not however in order. For he had neither heard the Lord nor followed him, but afterward, as I said, he followed Peter, who used to frame his teaching to meet the needs of his hearers, but not as making a connected narrative of the Lord’s discourses. So then Mark committed no error while he thus wrote down some things as he remembered them; for he took thought for one thing not to omit any of the things which he had heard, nor to falsify anything in them.

So then Matthew composed the oracles in the Hebrew language, and each man interpreted them as he was able.”

Papias, bishop of Hierapolis in Asia Minor, was writing during or soon after Trajan’s reign — in the same region Pliny governed. While Pliny dismissed Christianity as a superstition to be cured, Papias was carefully preserving the traditions of the apostles. His testimony shows that Christians of this time were not inventing novelties, but guarding what they believed came from Andrew, Peter, John, Matthew, and others.

Why Rome Considered Christianity a Superstition

Pliny the Elder had explained decades earlier:

Pliny the Elder, Natural History 30.12 (Loeb):
“Among foreign rites, it is only the ancient ones that have gained recognition; the rest are held accursed.”

Judaism was tolerated because it was ancient. Christianity, though born out of Judaism, was treated as new — and therefore dangerous. Rome did not see it as a venerable faith, but as an illegitimate superstition.

Conclusion

Pliny’s letter and Trajan’s reply give us the earliest imperial window into the treatment of Christians. They were punished not for crimes but for their name, not for sedition but for stubborn loyalty.

Rome called it obstinacy; Christians called it faith. Rome called it superstition; Christians called it worship. Rome called it contagion; Christians called it life.

And because this exchange took place late in Trajan’s reign, it shows that from AD 98 to 117 the policy never wavered: Christians were not to be hunted, but if accused and refusing to recant, they must die.

At the very same time, Ignatius longed to die for “my God,” Polycarp exhorted believers to live worthily of Christ, the Didache described the Eucharist as thanksgiving through Jesus, Hermas taught endurance as the path to life, and Papias preserved the sayings of the apostles.

Even Pliny, though hostile, could not deny the truth: Christianity was everywhere — men and women, rich and poor, city and countryside. It had weakened the pagan temples. It could not be forced into silence.

The empire tried to check and cure it. But history shows that the “contagion” of Christ only spread further — carried even by slaves who bore the title of deacon, ministers and leaders in their assemblies, and by all who confessed his name three times, even unto death.

The True Temple Rises: Christianity After AD 70

/ Jason Conrad / Leave a comment

When Nero died by suicide in AD 68, the Roman Empire plunged into chaos. In one year, four emperors—Galba, Otho, Vitellius, and finally Vespasian—rose and fell. While Rome burned and battled for power, Judea was in full revolt.

And in the smoldering ruins of that rebellion, Vespasian and his son Titus would become emperors. Their campaign didn’t just crush a revolt—it destroyed Jerusalem, leveled the Temple, and forever reshaped both Jewish and Christian identity.

The Revolt Begins: Taxes, Desecration, and Massacres

In AD 66, the Roman governor of Judea, Gessius Florus, pushed the people beyond their limits. He looted the Temple treasury—seizing 17 talents, equivalent to about $10 million today.

This wasn’t mere corruption — it was an act of sacrilege and robbery of funds consecrated to God.

The people mocked Florus by passing baskets around as though collecting alms for him. His response was slaughter. Josephus (c. AD 75–79) records:

“Florus sent soldiers into Jerusalem and ordered a massacre. They killed 3,600 men, women, and children—even Roman citizens of equestrian rank. Some were scourged, and then crucified.”
— Josephus, Jewish War 2.14.9 (Loeb)

This atrocity ignited full-scale revolt.

Roman Garrisons Overrun

Jewish Zealots stormed the Antonia Fortress, overran the Roman garrison, and then ambushed Roman forces at Masada. Josephus writes:

“They compelled the Roman garrison to surrender and slaughtered them. The war was now started in earnest.”
— Josephus, Jewish War 2.17.9 (Loeb)

Rome had no choice but to respond.

Vespasian in Galilee: Fire and Terror

Nero sent Vespasian, a seasoned general, to crush the uprising. Accompanied by his son Titus, he swept through Galilee.

At Jotapata, Josephus himself was the Jewish commander. He was captured there and became an eyewitness to everything that followed. His account of these events is not second-hand history; it comes from someone who stood in the middle of the war and later wrote under Roman patronage.

Josephus describes the fall of Jotapata:

“Forty thousand were slain, and the city was utterly demolished. Those hiding in caves were dragged out and killed.”
— Josephus, Jewish War 3.7.36 (Loeb)

In Gamla, the scene was horrific:

“People hurled themselves, wives, and children over the cliffs. The entire city was covered with corpses.”
— Josephus, Jewish War 4.1.9 (Loeb)

He sums it up:

“Galilee was filled with fire and blood.”

Christians in Galilee were not spared this. They lived in the same villages and towns, and the Roman army made no distinction. Alongside their Jewish neighbors, they too were killed, crucified, or driven into slavery. The suffering Josephus describes was shared by all, including those who confessed Christ.

Titus and the Siege of Jerusalem

After Nero’s death, Vespasian left for Rome, leaving the siege of Jerusalem in the hands of Titus.

Jerusalem was already fractured from within. Zealots and moderates fought each other while Roman forces built a five-mile siege wall to starve the city.

Josephus, still an eyewitness from the Roman camp, records the horrors inside:

“The famine was so severe that parents stole food from their own children. Dead bodies lay everywhere. No one had strength to bury them.”
— Josephus, Jewish War 5.12.3–4 (Loeb)

And then, one of the darkest accounts in ancient history:

“A woman named Mary… took her infant son, slew him, roasted him, and ate half, hiding the rest. When soldiers smelled the roasted flesh and stormed in, she said, ‘This is my son… I have eaten my own child.’”
— Josephus, Jewish War 6.201–213 (Loeb)

Titus pressed on. Though he claimed to want to spare the Temple:

“I gave orders to preserve the Temple, but my commands were ignored in the madness of battle.”
— Josephus, Jewish War 6.4.7 (6.254 Loeb)

The Temple burned. The city fell. Josephus claimed over 1.1 million people died in the siege.

For Christians, the destruction of the Temple wasn’t only tragedy — it was fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecy (Mark 13:2). The collapse of the Temple-centered world validated their conviction that Christ himself was the new and greater Temple.

Crucifixions Without Number

Josephus gives us two chilling glimpses of Roman cruelty:

“As for those who had fled from within the city, many were caught; and when they were caught, they were scourged and tortured, then crucified opposite the walls. The Roman soldiers, out of anger and hatred, nailed up those they caught, one after one way, and another after another, to entertain themselves by the variety. And so great was their number that there was not room enough for the crosses, and not crosses enough for the bodies.”
— Josephus, Jewish War 5.11.1 (Loeb)

And again:

“They caught those that had fled out of the city… and when they were caught, they were first scourged, then tormented with all sorts of tortures, and finally crucified before the wall of the city. Titus indeed commiserated their fate; yet he understood that their number was so great that room was lacking for the crosses, and crosses lacking for the bodies. About five hundred were crucified daily.”
— Josephus, Jewish War 6.1.1 (Loeb)

This was the empire’s logic of terror — the same system of crucifixion that had killed Jesus, now repeated on a scale of hundreds per day. Early Christians could never look at the Roman cross as anything but a symbol of cruelty and their Lord’s triumph over it.

Aftermath: Slavery, Spectacle, and the Jewish Tax

Thousands of survivors were:

  • Paraded through Rome in Titus’s triumph, forced to carry sacred items like the Menorah.
  • Sold into slavery across the empire.

Rome minted coins that read:

“Judea Capta” — Judea Captured.

And then came the fiscus Judaicus—the Jewish tax.

“He also decreed that all Jews throughout the world should pay each year two drachmas to the Capitol in Rome, as they had previously paid them to the Temple in Jerusalem.”
— Dio Cassius (c. AD 200–220), Roman History 66.7 (Loeb)

For Jewish Christians, this was especially complex. In Judea, they were still outwardly seen as part of the Jewish community and likely taxed along with them. But in Rome, Nero had already distinguished Christians as a separate group. The destruction of the Temple and the imposition of this tax pushed the divide further: Christians were being forced to decide — were they simply another branch of Judaism, or something distinct?

And the atmosphere in Rome was not one of tolerance. Suetonius (c. AD 120) records:

“He banished from the city the philosophers and the astrologers.”
— Suetonius, Vespasian 15 (Loeb)

This wasn’t aimed at Christians directly, but it reveals the suspicion with which Rome viewed any new teachers or rival authorities. The gospel’s claim that Jesus is Lord would have sounded as threatening to imperial ears as the mutterings of philosophers or astrologers.

The Arch of Titus

The victory was immortalized in stone. After Titus’s death, the Roman Senate and People built the Arch of Titus (c. AD 81), which still stands in Rome today.

The dedicatory inscription reads:

“The Senate and People of Rome [dedicated this] to the deified Titus Vespasian Augustus, son of the deified Vespasian.”

Inside the arch, the reliefs show Roman soldiers carrying the sacred objects of the Jerusalem Temple — the Menorah, the Table of Showbread, and even the Torah scrolls. Josephus describes the same scene in his account of Titus’s triumph:

“They brought the menorah and the table of the bread of the Presence, and the last of the spoils was the Law of the Jews. After these, a great number of captives followed.”
— Josephus, Jewish War 7.5.5 (Loeb, c. AD 75–79)

For Rome, this was not just a military victory. It was theological. In Roman eyes, Titus had defeated the Jewish god himself. That is why the arch presents Titus as a god honored for his conquest: our god overcame your god.

For Jews and Christians alike, the arch became a bitter monument. For Christians especially, it underscored the truth that the Temple was gone, but Christ had already promised: “Not one stone shall be left upon another.”

The Christians Who Fled – and the First Heretical Group

The church in Jerusalem did not perish in the siege.

“The people of the church in Jerusalem had been commanded by a revelation… to dwell in a town of Perea called Pella.”
— Eusebius (c. AD 310–325), Ecclesiastical History 3.5.3 (Loeb)

This flight preserved the core of the church, but not all Christians escaped. Those who stayed in Jerusalem, or who were caught in the countryside during Rome’s advance, would have shared the same fate as their Jewish neighbors — famine, crucifixion, or slavery. The Roman army made no distinction. To them, it was one rebellious people.

But at Pella, Christians regrouped. And in the same city, other Jewish survivors settled. Out of this mixture emerged the Ebionites, the first major heretical group.

  • They rejected Paul as an apostle.
  • They insisted on strict adherence to the Law.
  • They denied the full divinity of Jesus.
  • They used only a corrupted form of Matthew’s Gospel, altered to fit their theology.

Epiphanius (c. AD 375–400) writes:

“They accept the Gospel according to Matthew, but only that which is called ‘according to the Hebrews.’ They call it the Gospel of Matthew, however it is not complete and entire but falsified and mutilated.”
— Panarion 30.13.2

Irenaeus (c. AD 180) confirms:

“Those who are called Ebionites… use the Gospel according to Matthew only, and repudiate the Apostle Paul, maintaining that he was an apostate from the law.”
— Against Heresies 1.26.2

The fact that the Ebionites were already mutilating Matthew’s Gospel in the 70s AD shows that Matthew must have been written before the destruction of the Temple.

This stands in contrast to the critical scholarly view, which typically places Mark around AD 70 and Matthew and Luke in the 80s or later. Their reasoning? Jesus’ prophecy of the Temple’s destruction. They assume prophecy is impossible, and therefore the Gospels must have been written after the event.

But if Matthew was already available to be twisted by the Ebionites in the 70s, then Mark — the source they say Matthew used — must be earlier still. The Gospels, far from being late inventions, stand close to the events they describe.

For more on the Ebionites and their altered gospel, see my earlier blog post: [The Ebionites]

Rome’s Pride, God’s Judgment

Tacitus (c. AD 100–110) gives us the Roman perspective:

“Their temple was famous beyond all other works of men… it was resolved to raze it to the ground, that the religion of the Jews might be more completely abolished.”
— Tacitus, Histories 5.12 (Loeb)

But Jesus had said long before:

“Do you see these great buildings? Not one stone shall be left upon another that shall not be thrown down.”
— Mark 13:2

To Rome, it was conquest.
To Christians, it was fulfillment.

Conclusion: What This Meant for Christians

The fall of Jerusalem was not only a Jewish tragedy but a Christian turning point.

  • It validated Jesus’ prophecy of the Temple’s destruction.
  • It preserved the church through the flight to Pella — though many Christians were slaughtered along with the Jews.
  • It deepened the separation between Christianity and Judaism.
  • It produced the first major heresy (Ebionites), which ironically confirms the early existence of Matthew’s Gospel.

Tacitus summed up Rome’s perspective:

“It was resolved to raze it to the ground, that the religion of the Jews might be more completely abolished.”
— Tacitus, Histories 5.12 (Loeb, c. AD 100–110)

What Rome thought was the abolition of a religion, Christians understood as the vindication of Christ’s words:

“Not one stone shall be left upon another that shall not be thrown down.” (Mark 13:2)

Vespasian and Titus were hailed as saviors of Rome and later deified as gods. But their triumph was also God’s judgment — and the stage on which Christianity stepped into a new identity as the true temple of the living God.

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.

Caligula, the Jews, and the Birth of the Christian Name

/ Jason Conrad / Leave a comment

Introduction

When the Emperor Tiberius died in AD 37, the empire — and Judea in particular — was ready for change.
Years of suspicion and repression had left the people weary.

Into that moment stepped Gaius Julius Caesar Germanicus — better known by his childhood nickname, Caligula, “little boots.”
At first, he was welcomed as a breath of fresh air: the beloved son of the popular general Germanicus, a man whose family name still inspired loyalty in the legions.

But within months of taking the throne, Caligula’s rule took a shocking turn.
A serious illness changed him — or perhaps revealed him.
He began to speak and act as if he were not just Rome’s ruler, but Rome’s god.

Caligula’s four-year reign takes us into the early chapters of the book of Acts — roughly Acts 8 through Acts 11, and possibly touching Acts 12. This is the period after Stephen’s martyrdom, when Saul is converted, the gospel spreads to Samaria, and the first Gentiles come to faith.
In Acts 11:26 we read, “The disciples were first called Christians in Antioch.”
That moment, the birth of the Christian name, happens right around the time Caligula is assassinated.

At this stage in history, Christians were still viewed by Rome as part of the Jewish community. There was no legal distinction between them. Because of that, they came under the same imperial pressures as the Jews — but their primary opposition, as the book of Acts records, came from certain Jewish religious leaders, not directly from Rome.

Demanding Worship

Caligula’s early popularity soon gave way to demands for divine honors.

Cassius Dio, Roman History 59.28 (c. AD 200–235):
“He gave orders that the statue of Zeus at Olympia be brought to Rome, in order that he might set up a statue of himself in its place, and be worshipped as Zeus.”

Suetonius, Caligula 22 (c. AD 110–130):
“He demanded that all statues of the gods be brought to Rome and have his image set upon them.
Those who failed to swear by his Genius or sacrifice to him were executed or exiled.”

Cassius Dio, Roman History 59.6:
“He became terribly bloodthirsty, once stained with blood. He killed without trial anyone he suspected.
And because he was now calling himself a god, any slight was counted as sacrilege.”

Cassius Dio, Roman History 59.25:
“In Gaul he executed many nobles who failed to show delight at his arrival.
Some were accused of mocking the temples erected in his honor.”

These weren’t harmless eccentricities. Caligula’s divine pretensions were enforced with political terror. Refusal to participate in his worship could mean exile, confiscation of property, or death — whether you were a senator in Rome or a provincial subject.

Christians Were Still Seen as Jews

In the late 30s AD, the Roman state made no distinction between Jews and Christians.

The followers of Jesus still met in synagogues. They kept many Jewish customs. Their proclamation of a crucified and risen Messiah looked, to outsiders, like one more messianic variation within Judaism.

That meant that when Jews came under threat for refusing emperor worship, Christians came under the same threat — not because Rome recognized them as a separate group, but because they were still identified as Jews.

It’s important to remember: in this period, as Acts records, the primary persecution of Christians came from Jewish religious authorities and their allies, not from the Roman state.

The Temple Statue Order

Caligula’s most infamous act toward the Jews came in AD 39 or 40, when he ordered a colossal statue of himself to be placed in the Jerusalem Temple — the holiest site in Judaism.

Josephus, Antiquities 18.261–262 (c. AD 93):
“Petronius, the governor of Syria, was astonished at the constancy of the Jews… Tens of thousands came to meet him, begging him not to allow the laws of their forefathers to be transgressed. They threw themselves on the ground and exposed their necks, declaring they were ready to be slain rather than see the image set up.”

Josephus, War 2.195 (c. AD 75):
“They continued in this posture for forty days, lying prostrate on the ground and praying with tears that the laws of their forefathers not be violated.”

Josephus, Antiquities 18.278:
“They said they would rather let their land lie untilled than submit to such impiety. ‘We will neither fight nor flee,’ they said, ‘but if you wish, kill us. Slaughter us as sacrifices upon our own soil, and we shall die satisfied if we keep our Law.’”

This was a theological line that could not be crossed. The Jewish resistance was total and nonviolent, but it risked triggering a rebellion that could have spread far beyond Judea.

Philo Stands Before Caligula

In Alexandria, Jews were being attacked. Synagogues were seized. A delegation led by Philo of Alexandria (c. AD 40s) was sent to plead their case before Caligula.

Philo’s description in Embassy to Gaius is striking.

Philo, Embassy to Gaius 206:
“He would run to the peacocks and talk to them, then dart off to a cluster of trees… laughing loudly and pretending to judge the beauty of the statues.
We followed him like prisoners in a triumphal procession.”

Philo, Embassy to Gaius 351–352:
“He ridiculed us without restraint.
He said, ‘You are people who do not believe I have been made a god, although I am clearly one!’
And when we tried to explain our ancestral customs, he laughed louder still and said,
‘You are not defending your religion — you are insulting mine!’”

Philo, Embassy to Gaius 358:
“No one could guess what he would do next.
His madness was like the sea, stirred by contrary winds — always shifting, never at peace.”

The emperor’s mood, not the law, was the deciding factor for the fate of entire communities.

Petronius Risks His Life

In Judea, the man tasked with carrying out the statue order was the governor of Syria, Publius Petronius. He saw the Jewish determination to resist and feared the order would ignite a rebellion that could consume the whole region.

Josephus, Antiquities 18.297–299:
“Petronius took the blame upon himself… He wrote to Caligula saying that if he forced the image into the Temple, all Syria would be in revolt.
He told his wife and children to prepare for his death.”

Caligula sent a letter ordering Petronius to commit suicide. But before it arrived:

Josephus, Antiquities 18.302:
“The letter from Caligula, commanding Petronius to kill himself, was already on its way —
but a messenger arrived first announcing that Gaius was dead. And so Petronius was saved.”

What Was Happening in the Church?

During Caligula’s reign:

  • Jesus had been crucified just a few years earlier, c. AD 30.
  • Paul had been converted, c. AD 31–32.
  • The gospel had spread to Samaria and Antioch.
  • According to Acts 11:26, “The disciples were first called Christians in Antioch.”
  • The events of Acts 8–11 — and possibly into Acts 12 — take place during these years.
  • The primary persecution of Christians recorded in Acts during this period came from certain Jewish authorities (Acts 8:1–3; Acts 9:1–2), not from Rome.

Conclusion

Caligula’s reign ended in AD 41 when members of the Praetorian Guard assassinated him.
For the Jews — and for Christians — his death was seen as a deliverance.

But his four years on the throne left a deep impression: the empire could demand worship from its subjects, and refusal could bring you to the brink of death.

The birth of the Christian name in Antioch happened in this very period, under the shadow of an emperor who claimed to be all the gods.

In the next post, we’ll see how the man who succeeded him — Claudius — brought a surprising period of stability, and how, under that stability, the Christian mission exploded across the empire.

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.