St. Paul is the most influential Christian of all time. There are 13 letters attributed to him in the New Teastament, making up a quarter of the whole canonical Christian scripture. On top of that, Most of the Acts of the Apostles is devoted to tales of Paul.
Traditionally Paul is viewed as a bastion of orthodoxy and a crusader against the heretical Gnostics. Yet it is a remarkable fact that the Gnostics themselves never saw him in this light. Quite the opposite - the great Gnostic sages of the early second century CE called Paul "the Great Apostle" and honored him as the primary inspiration for Gnostic Christianity. Valentinus explains that Paul initiated the chosen few into the "Deeper Mysteries" of Christianity, which revealed a secret doctrine of God. These initiates had included Valentinus' teacher Theudas, who had in turn initiated Valentinus himself.
"Much of what passes for "historical" interpretation of Paul and for "objective" analysis of his letters can be traced to the second-century heresilogists. If the apostle were so unequivacally anti-Gnostic, how could the Gnostics claim him as their Pnuematic teacher? How could they say they are following his example when they offer secret teaching of wisdom and "Gnosis "to the initiates?" How could they claim his resurrection theology as the source for their own, citing his words as decisive evidence against the ecclesiastical doctrine of bodily resurrection?" -Elain Pagels Quote:
Originally Posted by Profpat  Leave it to Paul to not understand wisdom. |