Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

corpus-paul - Re: The Dutch Radical Approach to the Pauline Epistles

corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Corpus-Paul

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Fabrizio Palestini" <fabrizio.palestini AT tin.it>
  • To: "Corpus-paul" <corpus-paul AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
  • Subject: Re: The Dutch Radical Approach to the Pauline Epistles
  • Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 22:30:46 +0200


David

> I wish I could read the article (or the English rendering you
> mentioned). The English rendering is not on-line, is it?

No, unfortunately the English rendering is not on-line. Detering kindly
offered me the whole translation (made by dr. Doughty) for personal use.


> So, is Detering suggesting that Paul is a mythical creation derived
> from the Pseudo-Clementines (or the hypothetical Preaching of Peter
> that is supposed to underlay the PC), and meant to serve as its
> theological antithesis? Or were the PS composed to serve as a means to
> overturn the Paul myth created by Marcion, and associate him with the
> heretic Simon Magus?

Detering is suggesting that the Pseudo-Clementines find their roots in a
legendary background in which Simon and Paul are the same person.
The situation may be described like this: Marcion's Paul is simply Simon
Magus, Marcion's teacher (Paul being Simon's supernomen).
This names' ambiguity lead to different position: someone doesn't understand
the matter (or consciously propends for the differentiation, I don't know),
taking Paul as a totally different subject (negatively: Justine (perhaps?),
Judaizers or Ebionites; suspectly: Tertullian; positively: Luke and others),
others understand it and polemize against Simon as he was Paul.

Extracting from "Der Gefalschte Paulus", I can offer a small list of
parallels.
The whole subject cannot be investigated in as little time as I have.

In Pseudo-Clementines Simon Magus speaks as Paul (Clem. Hom. 17:19 // Gal
2:11ff), the heresies ascribed to him are Marcionite, he is described as a
missionary to the Gentiles like Paul (Clem. Hom. 2.17.3; 11.35.4-6) etc.

If we read critically Luke's Acts (8:9-25), we can understand even through
the tendentious lens of the orthodox writer the great importance that Simon
Magus had in this early period (8:10).
Comparing many apocryphal writings with the Pauline Epistles we find
interesting similarity between Simon and Paul:

Simon attempts to please men: "With the help of his father, the Devil, this
man pleases all people" (Acta Pt. c. Sim., 55, cf. also Hom. 18:6-10)
Paul seems to pick up this feature when he says: "Am I seeking to win over
the men or God? Or I am seeking to please men? If I still wanted to please
men, I would not be a slave of Christ" (Galatians 1:10).
Or: "So we speak, not to please men, but to please God who tests our hearts"
(1Thess 2:4).

Simon is the Son of Lawlessness.
Simon the Leper, Paul's sickness etc.
I'll give you a complete analysis in future, be sure! ;-)

Some manuscripts of Josephus (who speaks of "a Jew named Simon, who comes
from Cyprus and calls himself a magician", underlining the great hystorical
importance of Simon - Paul is nowhere mentioned) have the reading "Atomos"
besides "Simon".
Atomos is nowhere else attested as a personal name, and must therefore be
understood as a nickname. Atomos in Greek must be translated as "tiny one":
Paul.


When the "orthodox" church chose (I am over simplifying) to approve the
domesticated Paul among its apostles, automatically positions like
ebionites' one turn to be heretic (and therefore their texts were
destroyed), while writings like Pseudo-Clementines could survive.


> However, there is still no independent corroboration (like there is
> for Jesus) for the idea that Peter preached heresy or performed magic.

This idea is new for me, I am not able to insert it in a proper background
(someone appealed to Peter as defensor of "pauline" or "simonian" or
"marcionite" heresy?).
Could you offer me other hints?

Best regards
Fabrizio Palestini








Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page