Next to Jesus, the apostle Paul is the premier figure at the beginning of Christianity. His influence has been so vast that some have suggested he is the true founder of Christianity.1 Paul, born in the city of Tarsus, trained at the feet of Gamaliel (Acts 22:3), a highly honored teacher of the Torah who was a member of the Sanhedrin (Acts 5:34–39).2 Luke tells that Paul was born a Roman citizen (Acts 22:28),3 which would have given him boldness in his mission and ensured him proper juridical process.
Little doubt exists about Paul’s Pharisaic Jewish roots, the lens through which Paul understood his newfound Christian faith (Phil 3:4b–5). While Paul spent his earliest years in a thoroughly Hellenistic city of the diaspora, he was clearly shaped by his family and synagogue with the utmost devotion to the Jewish faith. Udo Schnelle sums up the seminal details of Paul’s background:
Paul was a citizen of the Roman Empire who had grown up in significant metropolis of the realm, had disciplined himself in an intensive Pharisaic education (possibly in Jerusalem), and had worked for about three decades in a province of the empire where Hellenistic culture prevailed. He was thus no wandered between different cultural worlds; he united in himself—like Philo and Josephus—the cultures of Hellenistic Judaism and Greco-Roman Hellenism.4
Paul often stressed two priorities of his ministry: to evangelize Gentiles (Rom 11:13; Gal 1:16; 2:7) and to plant new churches rather than build on the foundations laid by another (Rom 15:20; 1 Cor 3:6; 4:15; Gal 4:19).5 And yet before his missionary endeavors, Paul fiercely persecuted the Christian church. Both Luke (7:58–8:3; 9:1) and Paul (1 Cor 15:9; Gal 1:13, 23; Phil 3:6) report these persecutions similarly, which provides little reason to doubt their veracity. And yet because of a personal appearance of the risen Jesus (Acts 9:1–19; 22:4–21; 26:12–18), the former persecutor became the church’s foremost preacher and defender of the faith (1 Cor 15:8–11; Gal 1:11–16).
Beginning in Arabia, Paul took at least three missionary journeys throughout his life (2 Cor 11:32–33; cf. Acts 9:19–25). His trips included Cyprus and southern Asia Minor (Acts 13–14), Macedonia, Philippi, Thessalonica, Athens, Corinth (Phil 4:15ff.; 1 Thess 2:2; Acts 16–18), Antioch, Greece and Ephesus (Gal 2:11; Acts 18:18–20:38), and Rome via Jerusalem (Acts 21–28:31). Paul certainly intended to visit Spain6 (Rom 15:24, 28), and some believe he evangelized Britain.7
When he was first called as an apostle, Paul was told he would suffer deeply for Christ (Acts 9:16), which he came to see as proof of his apostleship and devotion to God (Gal 6:17; 2 Cor 6:4–10; 11:16–33), as well as his imitation of Christ (1 Thess 1:6). Paul recounts his suffering firsthand:
Five times I received at the hands of the Jews the forty lashes less one. Three times I was beaten with rods. Once I was stoned. Three times I was shipwrecked; a night and a day I was adrift at sea; on frequent journeys, in danger from rivers, danger from robbers, danger from my own people, danger from Gentiles, danger in the city, danger in the wilderness, danger at sea, danger from false brothers; in toil and hardship, through many a sleepless night, in hunger and thirst, often without food, in cold and exposure. And, apart from other things, there is the daily pressure on me of my anxiety for all the churches. (2 Cor 11:24–28)
This list of sufferings would not have been persuasive to Paul’s audience unless it at least closely resembled his actual experience.8 Luke also records that Paul was also stoned, beaten, and left for dead (Acts 14:19). He was attacked by crowds and dragged before magistrates (Acts 16:19–24). He was constantly in prison (2 Cor 6:4–5; Col 4:3; Eph 3:1; Philemon 1; Acts 21:33). In spite of these sufferings, he persisted in proclaiming the Gospel, expecting the same mistreatment wherever he went (Acts 20:23). Sacrificing the pleasures of this life to advance the Gospel, he was unswayed by the difficulty of the task before him (Rom 1:14–16). After listing the suffering and persecution Paul endured, Jürgen Becker concludes: “Yet whatever details we may quote, and however we may take into account the meagerness of our tradition from this period, there can be no doubt that the apostle was subjected to conspicuously frequent and especially severe persecutions.”9
How, amid such severe persecution and the possibility of death, could Paul so boldly proclaim the Gospel? The answer lies in his belief that the risen Jesus, whom he claimed to have personally seen, had already defeated death (1 Cor 15:55–56). Unlike later martyrs who suffered and died for resurrection reports that came secondhand from the testimony of others, Paul had seen the risen Jesus firsthand. He was an eyewitness of the resurrected Christ and suffered willingly for what he firmly believed to be true (1 Cor 15: 8; 9:1; Acts 9:1–6). Paul was convinced that Jesus had appeared to him after rising from the dead, and he willingly endangered himself for the sake of the Gospel.
The traditional view holds that Paul was beheaded as a martyr in Rome some time between AD 62–68 during the latter part of the reign of Nero (AD 54–68). Scholars disagree significantly over the validity of this tradition. According to A.N. Wilson: “[T]here is certainly no hard evidence that Paul died the death of a martyr.”10 Rather, he suggests Paul died in the west while missionizing Spain. On the other hand, John McRay argues that “there is little doubt that he [Paul] died under Nero’s reign in A.D. 67 or 68.”11 In order properly to evaluate the traditional view for the martyrdom of Paul, we must consider both the merits of each individual piece of evidence and the overall strength of the case. The Bible does not state the death of Paul directly, since all the writings cover earlier material.12 But there are some strong biblical hints that Paul viewed his death as imminent, and there is a consistent extra-biblical tradition that can help determine the likelihood of Paul’s martyrdom in Rome.
This investigation focuses on the literary evidence, since archaeological remains concerning Paul are late and themselves dependent upon literary evidence and tradition.13 And as with the case of Peter, this investigation focuses on what Markus Bockmuehl has dubbed “the living memory,” which would end by about AD 200.
While the particular location is technically not critical for demonstrating Paul’s death as a martyr, we should nonetheless consider the evidence for Paul’s presence in Rome, since it is so central to the traditional account and since it provides the link to Nero. Unlike the case for Peter being in Rome, little scholarly debate exists regarding Paul. Nevertheless, Dwight Callahan doubts Paul’s Roman journey and suggests he may have died in Philippi in fatal imprisonment.14 However, even if Callahan is right, then Paul still died as a martyr, which is the critical piece for establishing the sincerity of his convictions. Even so, the traditional view that Paul made it to Rome is firmly established.
Although a case can be made that all the prison epistles were written in Rome,15 Philippians, of Paul’s undisputed letters, provides the strongest case. Little doubt has been raised regarding Paul’s authorship; that is, while Corinth, Caesarea, and Ephesus have more recently been suggested as the place from which Paul wrote Philippians, from the second-century Marcionite prologue to the eighteenth century, it was considered an established fact that Paul composed Philippians from Rome.16 Evidence for Pauline authorship of Philippians in Rome can also be found through a careful internal analysis of the book.17 Nevertheless, while a strong case can be made for Pauline authorship in Rome, given the significant amount of scholarly disagreement as well as the additional arguments that can be fostered for a variety of locations,18 Roman authorship of Philippians must be held tentatively. Thus, the likely authorship of Philippians provides only slight corroborative evidence for a Roman journey by Paul.
The evidence from 2 Timothy is much more conclusive because Paul refers directly to his imprisonment in Rome (1:16–17; 2:9). Paul is either writing this account from Rome or based on a time when he was there. The difficulty arises as to how to place this imprisonment in the life of Paul. But the problem can be solved if Paul was released from his first imprisonment in Rome (Acts 28; Phil 1:18–19; 24–26: 2:24) and then later faced a more severe imprisonment in Rome, where he expected imminent death (cf. 2 Tim 1:16–17; 2:9; 4:6–8, 16–18).19
It may be objected that 2 Timothy is pseudepigraphical, and thus the reference to Rome is unreliable.20 Nevertheless, even if Paul is not the author of the Pastorals, including 2 Timothy, it must have come from a group intimately connected to the apostle Paul. Therefore, whether pseudepigraphical or not, 2 Timothy provides a strong link to an early tradition that favors Paul’s Roman occupation.
Perhaps Acts offers the strongest piece of evidence for Paul in Rome, where Paul says: “I was delivered as a prisoner from Jerusalem into the hands of the Romans” (Acts 28:17b). The book’s climax tells of Paul arriving in Rome, to preach (Acts 28:31). Most scholars today date Acts between 70 and 85, with some into the 90s. Even at the latest reasonable date, Acts would still be within the living memory of eyewitnesses who could easily disconfirm a Pauline hiatus in Rome. The lack of any early competing narrative for the demise of Paul elsewhere speaks strongly in favor of the traditional view that he was imprisoned in Rome.21
It cannot be objected that Rome is a mere add-on to the end of Acts. Acts 19:21 says: “After I have been there [Macedonia, Achaia, and Jerusalem], I must also go to Rome.” Furthermore, the whole purpose of the book of Acts is to record the spread of the Gospel to “the ends of the earth” (Acts 1:8). In comparison with rural Galilee, Rome was considered “the ends of the earth.”22 Rome is not meant as an end in itself, but as representative of the entire world. In other words, if the Gospel could reach Rome, it could reach anywhere.
One way to escape the reality of Paul’s trip to Rome is to consider Acts an ancient novel void of historical truth.23 Although this approach does offer some fruitful literary insights, the genre of Acts presents considerable problems for this view. For one thing, most novels used fictitious characters, and when they used real historical figures, they had little knowledge about actual events in the figure’s life; Acts, however, is filled with demonstrable historical events and characters.24 Rather than fictional, then, Acts is best understood as an ancient historiographical work, similar in many ways to other ancient histories of the time.25 Barring new arguments undermining the historical nature of Acts, the majority view that Acts is a historical text provides sufficient evidence that Paul was in Rome.
Along with the biblical testimony, unanimous evidence from the church fathers supports that Paul was in Rome. The first reference is in 1 Clement 6:1 (c. AD 95–96), which shows Paul was remembered in Rome within one generation of his death. Similar testimony can be found in writings of both Ignatius (The Letter to the Romans 4:1–3) and Tertullian (Scorpiace 15:4–6). The Acts of Paul also indicates Paul journeyed to Rome. The details, however, vary significantly from the canonical Acts. They have different points of departure and land at different places, which likely indicates they provide independent testimonies to Paul’s voyage to Rome.26
Paul’s journey to Rome, then, is firmly established by the reference in 2 Timothy 1:16–17, the historical account in Acts 28:11–31, the likely authorship of Philippians—and other prison epistles—in Rome, and the early and unanimous tradition from the apostolic fathers. In addition, lack of a competing site for his final imprisonment means no good reason exists to doubt the traditional account of Paul’s imprisonment in Rome.
Even though Paul suffered deeply and considered his own death a reality (for example, 2 Cor 5:1–10), the New Testament does not directly state the martyrdom of Paul—which we, of course, should expect, since all the New Testament books cover only material from before his death.27 Yet there are some strong hints that foreshadow his martyrdom in both the book of Acts and the Pastoral letters, where Paul strongly viewed his death as imminent.
The majority of scholars consider 2 Timothy pseudepigraphical and written some time during AD 90–110. If this late dating were correct, it would not undermine the principal argument made here because the text shows how his close followers and disciples, just one generation removed, viewed his death. In fact, if it is pseudepigraphical, then the author(s) would have written 2 Timothy with awareness that Paul had died, since the letter is typically considered Paul’s final will and testament.
Second Timothy portrays Paul in a Roman prison for preaching the risen Christ (1:11, 12; 2:8, 9). He has already undergone an initial hearing (4:16–18), and he firmly anticipates his own death (4:6–8). He writes to Timothy to offer instruction, admonition, and encouragement. Paul includes many details in the letter regarding changes he hopes to see in the life and ministry of Timothy, which reveals an underlying concern that he may never see him again.28 In anticipation of his own death at the hands of authorities, Paul encourages Timothy to come to him quickly (4:9).
Whereas in his letter to the Philippians Paul considered that his imprisonment could end in death (Phil 1:20–24; 2:17, 23), in 2 Timothy he has an added sense of urgency:
For I am already being poured out as a drink offering, and the time of my departure has come. I have fought the good fight, I have finished the race, I have kept the faith. Henceforth there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, will award to me on that Day, and not only to me but also to all who have loved his appearing. (2 Tim 4:6–8)
This passage is regarded as one of the most explicit references in the New Testament to Paul’s looming martyrdom.29 Paul expects his imprisonment will end in death (v. 6), he recognizes he has stayed faithful in his ministry, which is coming to an end (v. 7), and he anticipates his final heavenly reward (v. 8).
Paul uses two metaphors that indicate he views his death as imminent. First, he says he is “already being poured out as a drink offering” (v. 6). In ancient sacrificial systems, a liquid, such as oil or wine, was often poured out in sacrifice or consecration.30 In the Old Testament, the sacrifice of animals involved the pouring out of blood in a similar manner (Lev 16:15–20). Paul undoubtedly believes his own blood will be poured out as a sacrifice for the sake of the Gospel. Ignatius used the same metaphor to indicate his own looming martyrdom.31 Second, Paul says, “the time of my departure has come,” which is a known euphemism for death.32
With his impending death in mind, then, Paul encourages Timothy to struggle for the Gospel and to suffer as Paul did (1 Tim 4:10; 2 Tim 2:3; 3:12; 4:5). Paul’s “fight” has brought him to imprisonment in Rome, and as he now awaits execution, he calls Timothy, and other future believers, to follow his example amidst doctrinal error, godlessness, suffering, and even the prospect of martyrdom.
Finally, Paul anticipates the “crown” awaiting him for his life of faithful service (cf. Jas 1:12; Rev 2:10; 1 Pet 5:4). His crown is secured; it just awaits him to receive it. Even though Paul is unjustly sentenced to death, he will be declared righteous by the true judge—Christ. He is prepared to depart this world and enter the next. Paul does not fear death, but views it as the climax of his ministry, the consummation of his apostolic calling.
So, while 2 Timothy does not explicitly state the martyrdom of Paul, we should remember that it would make no sense in a letter attributed to him. Still, it does clearly indicate that Paul believed his death was imminent, as he compared himself to a libation and said he was prepared to depart from this world. He was imprisoned and prepared to die as a martyr for the sake of the Gospel. Ironically for the conservative position, if 2 Timothy is pseudepigraphical, it strengthens the reference to his death, since the author would have known about his fate and would have been bound by the known tradition of the time and incapable of fabricating an account of his impending death. Regardless, 2 Timothy 4:6–8 sets the stage for the expectation that Paul would be executed in Rome.
Although the Acts narrative ends before Paul dies, it includes hints of the apostle’s fate. A large number of English-speaking commentators—probably the majority—hold that the author of Acts was a traveling companion of Paul, so he would have known about Paul’s experiences of persecution,33 such as Paul’s willingness to die in Jerusalem for the sake of Christ (Acts 19:13). Moreover, a comparison of Acts 19:21 with Luke 9:51 indicates that Luke believes Paul travels through Jerusalem on the way to martyrdom.34 Stephen was charged in Jerusalem with defaming the temple and law (Acts 6:13). A similar charge is raised against Paul in Jerusalem (21:28). While these are probably trumped-up charges to condemn Paul,35 he does incite animosity and opposition similar to what brought about the martyrdom of Stephen (v. 30), and is only saved by Roman troops. In Acts 20, Paul gathers the Ephesian elders at Miletus and warns them to be alert because “wolves” will bring heresy into the flock once he is gone (20:29). After explaining the uncertainty of what will happen to him in Jerusalem, except suffering and imprisonment (20:23), they weep because “they would not see his face again” (20:38). Luke also structures Paul’s arrest and imprisonment in Acts after the account of Jesus in his Gospel,36 which indicates they will both face a similar fate. David Eastman explains:
Both Jesus and Paul go to Jerusalem despite a triple prediction that they will suffer there. Both receive a warm welcome and subsequently enter the temple, where they are seized. Both then endure a series of four trials, during which they are handed over to Gentiles, slapped, declared innocent three times, and subjected to a mob’s cry of “Away with him.” They submit themselves to God’s will and are treated kindly or praised by a Roman centurion (Luke 9:51–23:47; Acts 20:1–27:43). By the end of the accounts, both have fulfilled the preaching ministry given to them. It is striking that Luke does not complete the parallel by recounting the death of Paul. Nonetheless, an audience familiar with Jesus’ fate in Luke’s Gospel might infer that Paul was headed down a similar road in Acts.37
If Luke anticipates the fate of Paul throughout Acts, and Acts was written after Paul’s death—as most scholars agree—then why does Acts end with his imprisonment? Why does Luke not recount the fate of Paul? Scholars have ventured a number of possibilities,38 the most promising of which considers the purpose for which Luke wrote Acts—to record the spread of the Gospel from Jerusalem and Judea through Samaria to the “ends of the earth” (Acts 1:8)—making sense of its ending quickly upon Paul’s arrival in Rome: the purpose of Acts has been accomplished; Luke ends the narrative.39 Acts is not a biography of Paul, a trial brief, or a martyrdom account, but a historical account of the spread of the church from Jerusalem to Rome. Since the Gospel had reached Rome, it could now be spread everywhere. George MacRae concludes:
The journey of Paul in Acts first to Jerusalem and then to Rome analogously occupies a major part of the book (effectively 19:21–28:31) and represents the working out in the life of the model disciple the same journey toward suffering and death that was Jesus’. The difference is of course that Jesus has already made the journey. Paul can face the prospect of his fate with the confidence that was won for him by Jesus whose journey to death was crowned with resurrection and exaltation …. And perhaps it is the confidence of the divine assurance that enables the author of Acts to end his work not with the actual martyrdom of Paul but with the serenity of the Christian mission being fulfilled in Paul’s ministry in Rome.40
Another important reason for the abrupt ending of Acts may be that Luke wants to indicate that Christianity and Rome are compatible. Acts ends during the reign of Nero, but he had not yet begun his persecution of Christians. If Luke wanted to portray peace between Christianity and Rome, it would be wise to end the story before Paul’s martyrdom.41
Acts does not report the death of Paul, but Luke leaves significant hints that he is to be lead down a similar path as Jesus to martyrdom. Thus, while Acts cannot offer direct evidence for Paul’s fate, it provides the background expectation that Paul would ultimately die as a result of proclaiming his faith. Since it was written after Paul’s death, and Luke would undoubtedly have been aware of his fate, Acts provides supporting evidence for the traditional view that Paul died as a martyr in Rome. But to fully substantiate the traditional rendition, a look outside the New Testament for corroboration is needed.
As stated previously, 1 Clement (c. AD 95–96) is the first non-canonical document that refers to the martyrdoms of Peter and Paul. Its greatest value comes from its being an early account of Paul’s violent death written in Rome, where there could still be Christians alive who witnessed Paul’s imprisonment and death. Given that Clement only refers to Paul twice by name (5:5–7; 47:1), it is noteworthy that one of them includes a reference to his martyrdom. This is particularly significant since Clement is more concerned with drawing moral lessons from known facts than providing the precision one may expect in a historical work.42
While details regarding the manner of his fate are lacking, the immediate context strongly implies that Clement was referring to the martyrdom of Paul.43 In the preceding verses, Clement refers to Peter as a pillar of the faith who experienced profound suffering and was persecuted for his faith “even unto death” (5:2). Richard Pervo notes that the reason Peter and Paul were persecuted and ultimately martyred was because of “jealousy and envy.”44 And the phrase in 5:7 that Paul was “set free from this world” implies he was put to death. According to Bart Ehrman, this passage indicates the author was aware of a tradition that Paul was put on trial and eventually executed for his faith.45 First Clement 5:5–7 focuses specifically on the fate of Paul:
Because of jealousy and strife Paul pointed the way to the prize for endurance. Seven times he bore chains; he was sent into exile and stoned; he served as a herald in both the East and the West; and he received the noble reputation for his faith. He taught righteousness to the whole world, and came to the limits of the West, bearing his witness before the rulers. And so he was set free from this world and transported up to the holy place, having become the greatest example of endurance.
Clearly, the author of 1 Clement wants to reveal Paul as a model of endurance for others to imitate. Paul, then, is given considerably more space than Peter, indicating he is the prominent person in this text.46 Even though both Peter and Paul are among the “pillars” of the faith, Paul is the greatest example of endurance—he faced considerable persecution, yet continued to preach the Gospel throughout the world, and was ultimately executed for his faith.
First Clement 6:1 also provides a clue as to when their deaths occur: “To these men who have conducted themselves in such a holy way there has been added a great multitude of the elect, who have set a superb example among us by the numerous torments and tortures they suffered because of jealousy.” Clement’s reference to “a great multitude” is almost identical in wording to Tacitus’s reference to vast numbers (multitudo ingens) who were convicted and ultimately killed by Nero.47 Bruce concludes: “That this is a reference to the persecution of Christians in Rome under Nero is hardly to be doubted.”48 In sum, although one may wish 1 Clement 5:5–7 provided more details regarding circumstances surrounding the fate of Paul, this in no way discounts the substantial evidence it does provide for the traditional view that Paul was martyred under Nero in Rome.
Ignatius mentions Paul twice by name. Both instances have been taken as supporting the traditional view of Paul’s martyrdom in Rome. For analysis and discussion of the first passage, Letter to the Romans 4:3, see Chapter 5 in this volume. The second passage, which applies uniquely to Paul, appears in Letter to the Ephesians 12:2:
I know who I am and to whom I am writing. I am condemned, you have been shown mercy; I am in danger, you are secure. You are a passageway for those slain for God; you are fellow initiates with Paul, the holy one who received a testimony and proved worthy of all fortune. When I attain to God, may I be found in his footsteps, this one who mentions you in every epistle in Christ Jesus.
While Ignatius uses some hyperbole here, since Paul certainly did not mention the Ephesian church “in every epistle,” his clear point is to make an intimate link between the church at Ephesus and the apostle Paul, not to give a precise word count on the number of times he specifically mentions the Ephesians in all his letters.49
In this passage, Ignatius may be referring to Paul’s meeting with the Ephesian elders when they sent him off to imprisonment and eventual martyrdom (Acts 20:17–38), such that Ignatius sees his own impending martyrdom as following Paul’s example. Ignatius clearly aims to imitate Jesus,50 but practically he is following in the footsteps of Paul. Aageson concludes: “Ignatius holds Paul in the highest esteem, sees his own journey to martyrdom for God as following the pattern of Paul’s journey, and visualizes the Ephesians as the passage way of those slain for the sake of God.”51
But what does Ignatius mean by “proved worthy of all fortune”? Two reasons stand out to accept the phrase as a reference to Paul’s martyrdom. First, the context reveals that Ignatius considers Ephesus a “passageway” for those who are “slain for God” (martyred). In the wider context, Ignatius points specifically to Paul as an example the Ephesians would recognize as one who was slain for God. And immediately afterward, Ignatius says: “When I attain to God, may I be found in his footsteps.” In other words, Ignatius desires to face martyrdom with courage and commitment as Paul did. If Paul were not martyred, it would make no sense for Ignatius to raise him as his greatest example of imitation since he is en route to his own execution in Rome.
Second, to be “proved worthy of all fortune” was to deserve the reward of being with God, and Ignatius achieved this through imitation of the passion of Christ.52 Ignatius says, “It is better for me to die in Jesus Christ than to rule the ends of the earth,”53 echoing Paul (Phil 1:21). Ignatius sees his chains as a means of exhortation for other believers, which he bears on account of Christ so he may attain to God.54 In The Letter to the Magnesians, Ignatius said: “If we do not choose to die voluntarily in his suffering, his life is not in us.”55 Therefore, to acquire the greatest reward of being with God, Ignatius must suffer and die at the hands of the ruler of this age. Thus, Ignatius lifts up Paul as an example to imitate because Paul was proved worthy of all fortune through his faithful witness, suffering, and martyrdom for his faith.
Ignatius clearly believes Paul was martyred, and he expects to follow his example. How did Ignatius gain such knowledge? Did he talk to someone who knew the apostles firsthand? Did he meet the apostles? Was he merely passing on legends about their deaths? Byzantium hagiography considers Ignatius the boy Jesus used as an example to teach his disciples about greatness in the kingdom of God (Matt 18:2–5). Jerome says that Ignatius knew Polycarp, who was a disciple of the apostle John.56 While these claims are difficult to verify, chronologically and theologically speaking, Ignatius was undoubtedly close to the apostles.
Even at the latest possible date for his life and martyrdom (c. AD 135), Ignatius falls well within the window of living memory. Part of the significance of this letter is that Ignatius is writing to early Christians within the first generation after the death of Paul. If the tradition were not true, many believers would have corrected it. Yet Ignatius did not feel the need to exaggerate, ignore, or defend the martyrdom account of Paul. Instead, he simply assumes it in his Letter to the Ephesians—and possibly in his Letter to the Romans—as established fact. It seems reasonable to believe, then, that Ignatius was aware of an early tradition about the martyrdom of Paul in Rome.
Polycarp wrote this letter to the church at Philippi to encourage them to stay faithful to the core tenets of the faith (7:1), to live out the Christian faith (5:1), and to endure suffering as Christ, Paul, and the other apostles had (1:1; 2:3; 8:2; 9:2; 12:3). He apparently wrote his letter just after the death of Ignatius, since it appears Polycarp assumes Ignatius has died (1:1; 9:1), but has not received final confirmation (13:2). Polycarp encourages the church to follow the faith “that was delivered to us from the beginning” (7:2; cf. 3:1–3). Thus, Polycarp links the message he is delivering to the faith as taught by Jesus, Paul, and the first apostles.
Polycarp mentions Paul three times by name (3:2; 9:1; 11:3). Remarkably, one of those references makes it clear that Polycarp knew Paul and the other apostles had been martyred:
Therefore I urge all of you to obey the word of righteousness and to practice all endurance, which you also observed with your own eyes not only in the most fortunate Ignatius, Zosimus, and Rufus, but also in others who lived among you, and in Paul himself and the other apostles. You should be convinced that none of them acted in vain, but in faith and righteousness, and that they are in the place they deserved, with the Lord, with whom they also suffered. For they did not love the present age; they loved the one who died for us and who was raised by God for our sakes. (Letter to the Philippians 9:1–2)
The specific context of this passage is Polycarp’s guidance for Christians to imitate the model of Christ, even if they suffer for his name. The example of Paul is in the wider context of Jesus, who was crucified (8:1), and Ignatius, who died as a martyr (9:2). Then Polycarp refers to Paul and the other apostles, who “are in the place they deserved, with the Lord, with whom they also suffered” (9:2). The clear implication is that Paul suffered and faced a martyr’s death as Jesus and Ignatius did. Polycarp links their examples together as models for the Philippian Christians to imitate. Bart Ehrman indicates that Polycarp was aware of a tradition in which Paul and the other disciples were in fact martyred.57 Polycarp is confident that Christians at Philippi are as aware of the execution of Paul as of the crucifixion of Jesus—both by then matters of common knowledge and tradition, some time in the early to mid-second century, well within the range of living memory.
For an analysis of the value of the writings of Dionysius of Corinth for the martyrdom of Paul, see Chapter 5 in this volume.
Irenaeus wrote his most famous work, Against Heresies, at the end of the second century (c. AD 180), placing it within the range of living memory of the apostle Paul. Irenaeus believes his authority comes directly from the teachings of Peter and Paul, which have been passed down faithfully through a line of unaltered succession.58
In a section committed to defending the scriptural authority of the four Gospels, Irenaeus references the deaths of Peter and Paul:
Matthew also issued a written Gospel among the Hebrews in their own dialect, while Peter and Paul were preaching at Rome, and laying the foundations of the Church. After their departure [death], Mark the disciple and interpreter of Peter, did also hand down to us in writing what had been preached by Peter.59
Some have contested that “departure” simply means Peter and Paul left Rome, but the context makes this unlikely.
While Callahan, who discounts the significance of this reference, concedes that “departure” may refer to death, he argues that “early, unequivocal testimony of Paul’s martyrdom, in Rome or anywhere else, is entirely lacking in early Christian literature.”60 Callahan is right that this passage does not provide “unequivocal” evidence that Peter and Paul were martyred under Nero. But why discount one important piece of evidence just because it does not make the entire case? Were historians to rely upon unequivocal evidence to make judgments, very little could be known about the past at all. Rather, historical reasoning and knowledge is based upon probability that comes from weighing the totality of the evidence and asking, “What best accounts for the available evidence?” And as we have seen, numerous other early writings help establish their fates as well. The passage in Irenaeus, then, must be read in light of the totality of knowledge regarding the fates of the apostles. In this case, Irenaeus does refer to the deaths of Peter and Paul, although he does not provide further details. It is true that natural deaths for both of them would be consistent with the statement by Irenaeus. However, Irenaeus was sufficiently close to the Roman church to know its local tradition. Given the strength of the tradition at this time concerning the preaching and martyrdom of Peter in Rome, it seems most likely that Irenaeus was well aware of the accounts and felt it unnecessary to repeat.
The Acts of Paul is typically dated AD 170–180. Yet some scholars have argued that the range of dates should be much larger, encompassing AD 140–200.61 Peter Dunn has made a substantial case that it belongs in the first half of the second century.62 If he is right, then there is a Pauline tradition incorporating his martyrdom only separated from him by two or three generations, well within the range of living memory, that thus may provide some historical value for this investigation.
However, these kinds of typical dates offered for the Acts of Paul assume that a coherent whole has been composed by one author, an assumption which has come under increasing criticism. Based on manuscript evidence from the fifth century, Glenn Snyder has argued that multiple, independent works circulated and developed into what we now call the Acts of Paul. The same is likely true for the Martyrdom of Paul, which contains the account of his execution by Nero.63 Thus, Snyder concludes it was probably written during the reign of Trajan (AD 98–117).64 If this is true, then there is a remembrance of Paul only one or two generations after his death. In addition, we have reason to believe earlier pre-existing traditions, and in particular martyrdom traditions, may have circulated prior to their incorporation into the text. With these considerations in mind, then, we cannot simply dismiss Acts of Paul as an entirely legendary account divorced from historical consideration.
The Acts of Paul clearly does contain some legendary material, though, such as Paul baptizing a lion and milk spurting from Paul’s neck after decapitation (Acts of Paul 14). The characterization of Paul’s appearance (Acts of Paul 1.3), for instance, is also likely motivated by the text itself rather than offering an independent testimony of his real appearance.65 And yet Calvin Roetzel provides an important balance: “As fanciful and entertaining as these stories were, they enjoyed a tie, however loose it was, to history.”66
Many of the characters, for instance, such as Paul, Onesiphorus, Judas, Titus, Luke, Peter, Barsabas Justus, Nero, and Tryphaena, are known historical figures. The author is bound, at least to a degree, to describe their lives and roles in ways that match the known historical tradition, and since these historically attested characters show the author is not completely divorced from historical memory. While there may be redaction, there is not free-flowing invention. Further, the enmity between Christians and Romans in the Acts of Paul matches the known historical situation from authors such as Tacitus, 1 Clement 5–6, and The Ascension of Isaiah 4. Moreover, the mainstream, orthodox teaching of the Acts of Paul shows no significant signs of heresy or Gnosticism.67 It accurately preserves some of the teachings of Jesus as well as important facts surrounding his life. The Acts of Paul, then, should not be taken as straightforward history—it is, similar to the Acts of Peter, probably best understood as historical novel, in which historical memory binds legendary embellishment.68
The same challenge arises for the Acts of Paul as the Acts of Peter: How is historical memory distinguished from legendary embellishment? It is true that the writer of the Acts of Paul was not aiming to write a straightforward historical narrative of the life, ministry, and death of Paul, but likely combined tradition, legend, and genuine history. Since the Acts of Paul matches the early and unwavering account of Paul’s martyrdom in Rome, from both biblical and extra-biblical accounts, the tradition was undoubtedly fixed by the time of its composition.
Harry Tajra captures the likely historical core of the account of Paul’s martyrdom in the Acts of Paul:69
1. Paul died in Rome.
2. Paul was martyred during the reign of Nero.
3. Paul was a Roman citizen.
4. Paul was put through some kind of trial and then faced a violent death.
5. Paul was arrested as a result of his preaching.
The Acts of Paul, then, provides an important testimony to the martyrdom of Paul in Rome, possibly within one or two generations of his death. With a probable date between the late first century and the early second century, and with a likely composition in Asia Minor, the Acts of Paul provides considerable support that the traditional view of Paul’s fate had spread beyond the borders of Rome within a rather short time.
The uniform tradition has Paul executed by beheading. To establish that Paul was a martyr, it is not necessary to establish that he was in fact beheaded. Had he died by burning, for instance, he would still be a martyr. But since this is a core part of the tradition, it is important to consider its likelihood.
The first reference to Paul’s death by beheading is found in the Acts of Paul, specifically in the Martyrdom of Paul. A few years later, at the turn of the second century, Tertullian became the first church father to state that Nero had Paul beheaded in Rome.70 And then, in the early fourth century, Eusebius confirms this tradition.71
In the account in the Acts of Paul, Nero sends a decree that all Christians are to be put to death. Nero commands that prisoners be burned, but orders Paul beheaded according to Roman law. Schneemelcher finds this depiction not quite logical, since beheading was a less severe penalty.72 However, this ignores that the text emphasizes the beheading as according to Roman law, which would require a different mode of execution for a Roman citizen such as Paul. The part of the narrative that is clearly embellishment is the milk that spurts out at his decapitation. The beheading narrative may have been driven by the theological conclusions the author intended readers to adopt from this episode. However, it seems more likely the tradition was already established by the time the author composed the Acts of Paul and the spurting milk was added to provide theological significance.
Romans had a variety of methods of execution.73 In terms of beheading, Romans practiced decollation, which involved the use of a sword rather than decapitation with an axe.74 It was a common form of execution. King Herod had John the Baptist beheaded (Mark 6:27). James the brother of John was “killed with the sword” under Herod Agrippa (Acts 12:2). The book of Revelation reports the beheading of those who gave testimony for Jesus and refused to worship the beast (Rev 20:4). Eusebius reports that Caesar “beheaded all who seemed to possess Roman citizenship and sent the rest to the beasts.”75 Eusebius later notes that after proclaiming his faith, Apollonius was beheaded according to Roman law.76 The sword, a symbol of power, brought fear into the hearts of people. Even Paul recognized that governing authorities do not bear the sword in vain (Rom 13:4).
Given that (1) there is no alternative claim of how Paul met his fate, (2) it was a common form of execution, and (3) it fits with what else is known about Paul (for example, his citizenship), it is more probable than not that Paul was beheaded. This cannot be held with the same degree of confidence as his martyrdom, but we have no good reason to doubt that the earliest accounts contain a tradition that dates back to his actual mode of death.
Tertullian wrote at the turn of the second century, and thus falls at the limit of the living memory of Paul. Like the author of 1 Clement 5, Tertullian primarily depicts Paul as a model of resolute faithfulness and courage amidst suffering and of martyrdom.77 Tertullian shows considerable interest in the martyrdom of Paul, since the church by his day had experienced both suffering and martyrdom. Scorpiace 15:5–6 provides a significant reference to the martyrdom of Paul:
That Paul is beheaded has been written in their own blood. And if a heretic wishes his confidence to rest upon a public record, the archives of the empire will speak, as would the stones of Jerusalem. We read the lives of the Caesars: at Rome Nero was the first who stained with blood the rising faith. Then Peter is girt by another, when he is made fast to the cross. Then does Paul obtain a birth suited to Roman citizenship, when in Rome he springs to life again ennobled by martyrdom.
Tertullian reports that Paul was a Roman citizen, and links his death to the time of Nero. He is so confident of his claims that he tells his doubters to examine “the archives of the empire.” If there were no such public records, Tertullian would have automatically undermined his credibility. His appeal to them indicates his confidence that they existed and, if examined, would corroborate his testimony. Therefore, Tertullian was likely relying upon even earlier public records about the Neronian persecution and the fate of Paul and Peter, James, and Stephen.
Tertullian makes two further allusions to the execution of Paul and Peter in Rome. In the first instance, Tertullian defends the equal apostolic status of Peter as compared to Paul: “It is a happy fact that Peter is on the same level with Paul in the very glory of martyrdom.”78 Being on the “same level” does not require they face the same mode of execution, but that they were both apostles who died as martyrs in testimony for the faith. Tertullian is not trying to prove that either apostle was actually martyred, but to place Peter on equal footing with Paul. Tertullian assumes his audience are aware of the martyrdoms—he just makes sure they realize the implications of their equal fates. A few chapters later, Tertullian mentions again that Paul was beheaded like John the Baptist.79 Eastman rightly concludes: “The shedding of apostolic blood was central to the foundation and spread of the Christian message in Rome. Because their deaths mirrored those of Jesus and John the Baptist, Peter and Paul became model martyrs who blessed the Roman church.”80 Tertullian’s references to the apostle Paul show minimally that Paul was considered a model martyr by the end of the second century in North Africa.
The traditional view that Paul was beheaded during the reign of Nero, AD 64–67, has been carefully considered. There is additional later material that further confirms this tradition, but it will not be analyzed in depth, for this analysis has focused on the period of living memory.81
This close examination of the evidence indicates that the following points can be regarded to have varying degrees of confidence from works written within the living memory of Paul (until c. AD 200).
1. Paul was in Rome—the highest possible probability (possible authorship of Philippians from Rome; 2 Timothy 1:16–17; 2:9; Acts 28:17–31; 1 Clement 6:1; Ignatius, The Letter to the Romans 4:1–3; Tertullian, Scorpiace 15:4–6; Acts of Paul; the lack of any competing narrative).
2. The martyrdom of Paul—the highest possible probability (2 Tim 4:6–8; Acts 19:21–28:31; 1 Clement 5:5–7; Ignatius, Letter to the Ephesians 12:2; Letter to the Romans 4.3; Letter to the Philippians 7:1; Dionysius of Corinth [Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 2.25]; Irenaeus, Against Heresies 3.1.1; Acts of Paul; Tertullian, Scorpiace 15:5–6; The Prescription Against Heretics 24, 36; the lack of any competing narrative weighs favorably for the traditional view; the early and persistent tradition is that Paul was martyred for his faith).
3. Martyrdom during the reign of Nero, AD 64–67—very probably true (Acts of Paul; Tertullian, Scorpiace 15:5–6; the chronology of Paul’s life82).
4. The beheading of Paul—more probable than not (Acts of Paul; Tertullian, Scorpiace 15:4; The Prescription Against Heretics 36; Hippolytus on the Twelve 13; Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 2.25; lack of any competing version of his death).
1 William Wrede, Paul (London: Philip Green, 1907).
2 Many scholars question whether Paul truly studied personally with Gamaliel. Even if Luke overstates Paul’s connection to Gamaliel, Paul still would have been deeply influenced by Gamaliel since he influenced the practice of every Pharisee. See Bruce Chilton, Rabbi Paul: An Intellectual Biography (New York: Doubleday, 2004), 35.
3 For an in-depth analysis of the citizenship of Paul, see Brian Rapske, The Book of Acts and Paul in Roman Custody, ed. Bruce W. Winter (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1994), 71–112.
4 Udo Schnelle, Apostle Paul: His Life and Theology, trans. M. Eugene Boring (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 2003), 81.
5 Klaus Haacker, “Paul’s Life,” in The Cambridge Companion to St. Paul, ed. James D.G. Dunn (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003), 27.
6 Regardless of whether Paul made it to Spain or not, there is general agreement that Paul met his fate in Rome, which is key for establishing the traditional account of his martyrdom. For an analysis of the evidence for a Spanish mission, see Otto F.A. Meinardus, “Paul’s Missionary Journey to Spain: Tradition and Folklore,” The Biblical Archaeologist 41 (1978): 61–63.
7 George F. Jowett, The Drama of the Lost Disciples (Bishop Auckland, England: Covenant, 2004), 182–97.
8 Stephen C. Barton, “Paul as Missionary and Pastor,” in The Cambridge Companion to St. Paul, ed. James D.G. Dunn (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003), 40.
9 Jürgen Becker, Paul: Apostle to the Gentiles, trans. O.C. Dean, Jr. (Louisville, KY: John Knox Press, 1993), 170.
10 A.N. Wilson, Paul: The Mind of the Apostle (New York: W.W. Norton, 1997), 249.
11 John McRay, Paul: His Life and Teaching (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 2003), 257.
12 It is true that a majority of scholars accept the seven undisputed letters of Paul and believe that some of the letters, such as the Pastoral Epistles, were written after his death. But even if these letters are pseudepigraphical and written at the beginning of the second century, they still attempt to cover material from within the lifetime of Paul. It would make no sense for a pseudepigraphical author to include concrete evidence for Paul’s death when it claims to be written by Paul himself!
13 Ernst Dassmann, “Archaeological Traces of Early Christian Veneration of Paul,” in Paul and the Legacies of Paul, ed. William S. Babcock (Dallas, TX: Southern Methodist University Press, 1990), 282.
14 Allan Dwight Callahan, “Dead Paul: The Apostle as Martyr in Philippi,” in Philippi at the Time of Paul and After His Death, ed. Charalambos Bakirtzis (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2009), 76.
15 Harry W. Tajra, The Martyrdom of St. Paul (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 1994), 51–72.
16 Gerald F. Hawthorne, Philippians, Word Biblical Commentary, vol. 43 (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 2004), xl.
17 Richard J. Cassidy, Paul in Chains: Roman Imprisonment and the Letters of St. Paul (New York: Crossroads, 2001), 126–35.
18 For a recent survey of the evidence for and against the various imprisonment options (Rome, Caesarea, Corinth, Ephesus), see Hawthorne, Philippians, xl–l.
19 Gordon D. Fee, 1 and 2 Timothy, Titus, New International Biblical Commentary (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1988), 3–5.
20 Some scholars have suggested that the author of the Pastoral Epistles made up the historical allusions to give the letters some degree of credibility. Thus, historical allusions are merely fiction. But, as Guthrie has observed, allusions in the Pastorals as well as the historical references have a sense of realism that is not accounted for by the fictional model, which is why many who take the fictional approach admit there is still a historical core. See Donald Guthrie, The Pastoral Epistles: An Introduction and Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1996), 28.
21 The Alexandrian and Western texts of Acts do vary in significant details regarding Paul’s trip to Rome. But most significantly, they both agree that Paul ended up in Rome. For a comparison, see Jerome Murphy-O’Connor, Paul: A Critical Life (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996), 351–54.
22 Richard I. Pervo, Acts: A Commentary on the Book of Acts, Hermeneia (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2009), 677.
23 Burton L. Mack, Who Wrote the New Testament? The Making of the Christian Myth (New York: HarperCollins, 1995), 11–15.
24 C.K. Barrett, “The Historicity of Acts,” Journal of Theological Studies 52 (1999): 515–34; Colin Hemer, The Book of Acts in the Setting of Hellenistic History, ed. Conrad H. Gempf (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1990).
25 Ben Witherington III, The Acts of the Apostles: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1998), 24–39.
26 Peter Wallace Dunn, “The Acts of Paul and the Pauline Legacy in the Second Century” (Ph.D. diss., Queens College, Cambridge, 1996), 32.
27 The one possible exception is the two witnesses who will give their testimony and then be conquered and killed by the beast (Rev 11:3, 7–8). However, scholars have almost universally rejected the idea that the two witnesses are Peter and Paul.
28 Murphy-O’Connor, Paul: His Story (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004), 232.
29 David L. Eastman, Paul the Martyr: The Cult of the Apostle in the Latin West (Atlanta, GA: Society of Biblical Literature, 2011), 141.
30 Homer, Odyssey 12.363; Plutarch, Obsolescence of Oracles 49; Num 15:5, 7, 10; 2 Sam 23:16–17; Ps 16:4.
31 Ignatius, Letter to the Romans 2:2.
32 William D. Mounce, Pastoral Epistles, Word Biblical Commentary, vol. 46 (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 2000), 578.
33 Craig S. Keener, Acts: An Exegetical Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 2012), 1:407.
34 Schnelle, Apostle Paul, 360.
35 C.K. Barrett, Acts of the Apostles, Hermeneia, vol. 2, 2nd ed. (New York: T. & T. Clark, 2004), 1,020.
36 Richard Longenecker, Acts, in vol. 9 of The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, ed. J.D. Douglas and Frank E. Gaebelein [Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1981], 515); Dennis. R. MacDonald, “Apocryphal and Canonical Narratives about Paul,” in Paul and the Legacies of Paul, ed. William S. Babcock (Dallas, TX: Southern Methodist University Press), 64–66.
37 Eastman, Paul the Martyr, 18.
38 G.W. Trompf, “On Why Luke Declined to Recount the Death of Paul: Acts 27–28 and Beyond,” in Luke–Acts: New Perspectives from the Society of Biblical Literature Seminar, ed. Charles H. Talbert (New York: Crossroad, 1984), 232–34.
39 Luke uses different characters in the story of Acts to further his end, and when that end is completed, Luke ceases to focus on them. If the life of the characters do not end in death (for example, John, Jesus, Stephen), they abruptly drop out of the narrative (Philip, Peter). Or in the case of Paul, since Luke has no further narrative interest in his fate, the story simply ends. See Daniel R. Schwartz, “The End of the Line: Paul in the Canonical Book of Acts,” in Paul and the Legacies of Paul, ed. William S. Babcock (Dallas, TX: Southern Methodist University Press, 1990), 23.
40 George W. MacRae, “Whom Heaven Must Receive Until the Time: Reflections on the Christology of Acts,” Interpretations 27 (April 1973): 151–65.
41 Luke does go out of his way to indicate how fairly Paul was treated as a prisoner in Rome (28:16b, 30). He also indicates that the Romans had previously wanted to release him in Caesarea (26:30–32; 28:18).
42 F.F. Bruce, “Paul in Rome: 5 Concluding Observations,” Bulletin of the John Rylands Library 50:2 (1968): 270.
43 See the discussion in Chapter 5 of this volume.
44 Richard I. Pervo, The Making of Paul: Constructions of the Apostle in Early Christianity (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2010), 132. Pervo doubts the historical value of 1 Clement, as well as the rest of the Gospels and the book of Acts. But the salient point for this discussion is that he interprets 1 Clement 5:1–7 as referring to the martyrdoms of Peter and Paul.
45 Bart Ehrman, Peter, Paul, and Mary Magdalene: The Followers of Jesus in History and Legend (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006), 173.
46 Andreas Lindemann, “Paul in the Writings of the Apostolic Fathers,” in Paul and the Legacies of Paul, ed. William S. Babcock (Dallas, TX: Southern Methodist University Press, 1990), 29.
47 Annals 15.44.2.
48 F.F. Bruce, Paul: Apostle of the Heart Set Free (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2000), 448.
49 Lindemann, “Paul in the Writings,” 36.
50 Ignatius, Letter to the Ephesians 10:3.
51 James W. Aageson, Paul, the Pastoral Epistles, and the Early Church, ed. Stanley E. Porter (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2008), 124–25.
52 W.H.C. Frend, Martyrdom and Persecution in the Early Church (Oxford: Blackwell, 1965; corrected ed., Cambridge: James Clark, 2008), 198.
53 Ignatius, Letter to the Romans 6:1.
54 Ignatius, Letter to the Trallians 12:2.
55 Ignatius, The Letter to the Magnesians 5:2.
56 Saint Jerome, On Illustrious Men, trans. Thomas P. Halton (Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press, 1999), 16:2.
57 Bart D. Ehrman, ed. and trans., The Apostolic Fathers (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2004), 1:327.
58 See Chapter 5 in this volume.
59 Iranaeus, Against Heresies 3.1.1.
60 Callahan, “Dead Paul,” 78.
61 Tertullian refers to the Acts of Paul around AD 200, so it cannot be later than this date. A. Hilhorst, “Tertullian on the Acts of Paul,” in The Apocryphal Acts of Paul and Thecla, ed. Jan N. Bremmer (Kampen, The Netherlands: Kok Pharos, 1996), 162.
62 Dunn, “The Acts of Paul,” 199.
63 Glenn E. Snyder, Acts of Paul: Formation of a Pauline Corpus, ed. Jörg Frey (Tübingen, Germany: Mohr Siebeck, 2013), 15–17, 254.
64 Ibid., 59–63.
65 Jan N. Bremmer, “Magic, Martyrdom and Women’s Liberation,” in The Apocryphal Acts of Paul and Thecla, ed. Jan N. Bremmer (Kampen, Netherlands: Kok Pharos, 1996), 39. In the case of the martyrdom of Paul, there are earlier records of his death, as we have seen, that help establish its historical core. But the appearance of Paul is first recorded in this text, and seems to meet the needs of the author, and so it is likely a fabrication.
66 Calvin Roetzel, Paul: The Man and the Myth (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1999), 6.
67 Hans-Josef Klauck, The Apocryphal Acts of the Apostles, trans. Brian McNeil (Waco, TX: Baylor University Press, 2008), 74.
68 Ibid., 7–10.
69 Tajra, The Martyrdom of Paul, 131–33.
70 Tertullian, Scorpiace 15:4; The Prescription Against Heretics 36.
71 Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 2.25.
72 Wilhelm Schneemelcher, ed., New Testament Apocrypha, trans. R.M. Wilson (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2003), 2:231.
73 Tacitus, Annals 15.44:2–5.
74 Suetonius, Nero 49; Tacitus, Annals 2.32; John S. Pobee, Persecution and Martyrdom in the Theology of Paul, Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplement Series, ed. Bruce D. Chilton (Sheffield, England: JSOT, 1985), 5.
75 Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 5.2.
76 Ibid. 5.21.
77 Robert D. Sider, “Literary Artifice and the Figure of Paul in the Writings of Tertullian,” in Paul and the Legacies of Paul, ed. William S. Babcock (Dallas, TX: Southern Methodist University Press, 1990), 106.
78 Tertullian, The Prescription Against Heretics 24.
79 Ibid. 36.
80 Eastman, Paul the Martyr, 160.
81 Peter of Alexandria (AD 306), Aphrahat, Demonstration XXI: Of Persecution (§ 23); Do Poenitentia: Epistola Canonica 9; The Acts of Peter and Paul (AD 350); Jerome (AD 392), Tractate on Psalm 96, lines 176–83.
82 Robert Jewett, A Chronology of Paul’s Life (Philadelphia, PA: Fortress Press, 1979).