Paul as Simon Magus


Well-Known Member
Reaction score
Has anyone read the letters by Clement(end of first century)? The Clementine Homilies. Clement was chosen by Peter to become first bishop of church. These homilies are used by some Christians to support the New Testaments validity.
What may be unknown to some is that Clement claims that Paul threw James (the brother of Jesus) down the temple steps and that Paul's authority was questioned By Peter. Peter claimed he didn't preach the same message that Jesus did.

Some scholars believe that Simon Magus was a pseudonym for Paul.
Some scholars believe the bible is all myth.
Some scholars believe in tormenting the saints and anyone who abides in the bible and that which was done by the Prophets and Apostles.
Some scholars believe mysticism is the only way.
Some scholars believe that God has 8 arms.
Some scholars believe that in no way could a young woman pertain to a virgin.
Some scholars believe all bibles should be destroyed.
Some scholars believe there bias religion will rise above all other religions and rule the world.
Some scholars believe anyone who puts faith in God and the bible is blind and foolish and that God is dead.
Some scholars believe a lot of things.

8 For the Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, neither angel, nor spirit: but the Pharisees confess both.

9 And there arose a great cry: and the scribes that were of the Pharisees’ part arose, and strove, saying, We find no evil in this man: but if a spirit or an angel hath spoken to him, let us not fight against God.

10 And when there arose a great dissension, the chief captain, fearing lest Paul should have been pulled in pieces of them, commanded the soldiers to go down, and to take him by force from among them, and to bring him into the castle. 11 And the night following the Lord stood by him, and said, Be of good cheer, Paul: for as thou hast testified of me in Jerusalem, so must thou bear witness also at Rome.

12 And when it was day, certain of the Jews banded together, and bound themselves under a curse, saying that they would neither eat nor drink till they had killed Paul.

13 And they were more than forty which had made this conspiracy.

14 And they came to the chief priests and elders, and said, We have bound ourselves under a great curse, that we will eat nothing until we have slain Paul.
15 Now therefore ye with the council signify to the chief captain that he bring him down unto you to morrow, as though ye would enquire something more perfectly concerning him: and we, or ever he come near, are ready to kill him.

Looks to me like the same thing they did with Jesus.
Have a good time beating and killing Paul.:(
Bandit, I am not beating Paul. I know him no better than you do. I was simply asking if anybody had read the Clementine homilies. Clement was picked by Peter to succeed him. This is a fact. It is a fact that Clements letters have been used to supprt certain Christian claims. It is a fact that wrote of a struggle between Paul and James.

How do you propose that I am beating him? If anybody did it was Clement not me.

My question remains to those knowledgable if they have read these homilies.
My question remains to those knowledgable if they have read these homilies.
Yes I have read them and I know the direction of this religious discourse and some of it is also conspiracy.
There were other struggles between some of the other apostles but they all came to agreement.
What happened during the set up of the early Catholic era that came after the Apostles is full of bitternes and strife and deciet and lies and I am not drawn to those things and neither do I believe what happened is right, neither do I agree with how the early church was set up and the false doctrines that came out of it. I do not include myself or my beliefs in what happened in early Rome.
These issues are why people are still arguing today. I have put them behind me.
I also do not believe in this conspiracy against Paul and what some scholars claim about him just as you do not believe in some things that I do.

With that being said,

and with all respect to you and your beliefs I will not come back to this thread and bring up the issues which counter attack or build a case and debate your belief on things written. Facts or no Facts.
In the future I pray and kindly ask that you will also honor my beliefs and topics that I hold dear to my heart without debating them with me. Allowing those who do share the same belief to have a healthy discussion on there belief without debating or disputing it with those who do not share that belief. I have no interest in debates on beliefs, though I know some do.
Interfaith and sharing beliefs and questions are one thing, but disputing them and rivaling is a another.
Carry on brother, I have nothing else to add to this.

2:14 Do all things without murmurings and disputings:
There was clearly an unresolved rift between Paul and the established clergy. But there's not enough evidence to offer any speculation of substance. If Marcion the heredox could be called by Polycarp the firstborn son of the devil, then its possible that Paul could have a parody written about him. The Simon Magus story was re-written by hostile Jews in the fourth century to involve Jesus. Like Bandit said, everyone has an opinion. The conflict apparently wasn't great enough to deserve the attention of the early church fathers. More than they gave it anyway. The fact that the Acts of the Apostles looks favorably on Peter and Paul and contains the Simon Magus story seems to indicate that if there was a Paul/Magus tradition it was forgotten within the first century.
Nice to see you back, Mus Zibii. :)

As for Simon Magus - although the original question is about Clement, it would be helpful for more background details on the sources regarding Simon Magus.
Its nice to stop by and see more than the three discussion that were carrying on when I left.

To be honest, I wasn't clear about the original question. There's a lot of conflict about Christian leadership, revolving around Peter, Paul and James. I look at the Acts story as if it were just a story and see meaning in the names. Peter, the Rock, Paul the Lesser or Little One. That seems deliberate in story telling. But then you have to deal with the historical element where James has an obscured but undeniable role.