Talk:Simon Magus
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
What does "the founder of witchcraft in old asia" mean? What is "old asia" and why isn't "asia" capitalized?
I was just about to make the same comment. That sentence doesn't make sense, let's strike it. "Founder" of witchcraft? Old asia? Seems like some sort of wiccan speculation.
Contents |
[edit] The {} sign/s
One or more of the sign/s: {{NPOV}}{{expansion}}{{Cleanup}} placed on this page without any discussion, explanation or reasoning have been removed pending further discussion. (The category Category:Bible stories is now up for a vote for deletion at Wikipedia:Categories for deletion#Category:Bible stories) Thank you. IZAK 08:29, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Re: Simon Magus
Simon Magus and St. Peter( the supposed first pope of catholic and first apostle), are one. Do the research, you won't have to imagine or read between the lines.
...right. Anyway the following needs a source:
- The story of Simon Magus here may actually be a coded Ebionite attack on Paul of Tarsus, with Simon used to represent Paul.
It sounds like speculation to me.--Cuchullain 01:30, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
-
- i Agree i think Peter (Simon) and Simon Magus were two seperate people, but st.peter the first Pope was Simon Magus
[edit] Re: Simon Magus
Simon Magus and St. Peter are not the same. If you read the Clementine Recognitions, you will find that Simon Magus (and possibly his spouse Helen) came from the ranks of John the Baptist and he was his beloved disciple. After John's death, Simon was absent in Alexandria and he did not become the head of John's school. This function was given to Dositheus. However, it is clear that both Jesus and Simon were disciples from John te Baptist.
As you may know from the Gnostic Gospels, St. Peter was very anti-feminine. After the Council of Nicaea this became the Church's official doctrine. At this Council the Bible as we know is was established and many other scriptures were destroyed as musch as possible, some of which have been rediscovered as the Nag Hammadi Texts. Before this Council it was very common for females to take the ranks of priests and bishops. After the Council of Nicaea the St. Peter doctrines became the main doctrines.
Simon however preached a from of duality: male-female, which is also appearing in many Gnostic beliefs. Some believe he even undertook sexual rites. The Church is condemning him as evil and a sorceror (which literally means evil-doer). He is the complete opposite of St. Peter.
Delicate note however. In Jewish scriptures (Talmud), Jesus himself is also procalaimed to be a sorceror.
Brynnar, October 13, 2005
-
- Sorceror does not literally mean "evil-doer", it more closely means means "one who influences (fate, fortune, etc)".
[edit] the forum?
Does anyone Know what exactly was the forum inwhich Magus died in the Article?
[edit] First heritic?
Interestingly, the German article points out that Simon was listed as the first heritic in the New Testament. I find no mention of that in this article. Is there a reason for this discrepancy? --Walter Görlitz 21:21, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
- The Book of Acts criticises Simon for simony (which is named after him, as is magic). Clinkophonist 22:06, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
Can someone get rid of the huge gap between the 4th and 5th paragragh
[edit] Paul as Simon Magus
I've removed the paragraph on this subject, as it is completely unsourced. If anyone can provide a source, we can edit it accordingly and reinstate it. Here it is:
- According to some academics, Simon Magus may in fact be a cypher for Paul of Tarsus, with Paul originally been detested by the church, and the name changed when Paul was rehabilitated by virtue of forged Epistles correcting the genuine ones. Though at first glance this suggestion appears completely radical, Simon Magus is sometimes described in apocryphal legends in terms that would fit Paul. Furthermore while the Christian Orthodoxy frequently portrayed the major gnostic leader Marcion as having been a follower of Simon Magus, Marcion nowhere mentions even the existence of Simon, and instead identifies himself as a follower of Paul. More significantly, the apocryphal Apocalypse of Stephen presents Paul in extremely negative tones, portraying him as arch villain and enemy of Christianity, only grudingly portraying him as having converted right at the end.
john k 17:08, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
F C Baur is one source for this. Also A. Hilgenfeld, and more recently Hermann Detering ("The Falsified Paul: Early Christianity in the Twilight" - 1995 (translated into English in 2003)). Oh, and J.R.Porter, The Lost Bible, pg 230 (which is cited in the edit summary immediately before your deletion). So I've put the paragraph back. Clinkophonist 18:35, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Incorrect account of death?
The account of Simon Magus' death appears to conflict with the stated source and should be verified and if necessary corrected or removed.
The article states that:
- The apocryphal Acts of Peter gives a legendary tale of Simon Magus' death. Simon is performing magic for the Roman Emperor Claudius Caesar in the forum. In order to prove himself to be a god, he flies up into the air. The Apostles Peter and Paul pray to God to stop his flying, and he stops mid-air and falls to his death.
A version of the Acts of Peter can be read here [1]. The death of Simon Magus is in chapter 32 and conflicts with the account above in many ways:
- Claudius Caeser is not mentioned. Simon Magus performs to a crowd.
- Paul is not mentioned.
- Simon Magus does not "fall to his death". He falls and breaks his legs in three places. He is then stoned by the crowd, but effectively dies (probably quite a while later) when two physicians attending to him cut him "sorely"
I'm not sure whether the version of the Acts of Peter on this website is authoritative or whether there are other versions. Agneau 23:09, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
That probably should be altered in the article. Clinkophonist 12:35, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] References
Simon the Magician is a main character in the book, "The Silver Chalice" by Thomas B. Costain. Can/should this be added? Missjessica254 18:57, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Good Article
Add footnotes and renominate this article as a Good Article. --GoOdCoNtEnT 06:36, 10 August 2006 (UTC)