Paul the Gnostic Feminist

Inscription of Sergius Paullus, whose attendant Bar-Jesus
was said to have been blinded by God after talking with Paul in Acts
Pictures taken from In Search of Paul, by John Dominic Crossan and Jonathan L. Reed

Inscription from Corinth naming Erastus, mentioned in Romans, as treasurer


The bema where Acts 18:12 says that Paul was brought before the proconsul of Corinth
for subverting Jewish law; Not wishing the decide on Jewish law, Gallio dismisses them


Excavations into ancient Corinth by the American School of Classical Studies


Overview of the ancient Corinth harbor on the isthmus
that separates the Peloponnese from the Greek mainland
Pictures taken from In Search of Paul, by John Dominic Crossan and Jonathan L. Reed

“You see, brother, how many thousands of Jews have believed, and all of them are zealous for the law. They have been informed all the Jews who live among the Gentiles to turn away from Moses, telling them not to circumcise their children or live according to our customs. What shall we do? They will certainly hear that you have come, so do what we tell you. There are four men with us who have made a vow. Take these men, join in their purification rites and pay their expenses, so that they can have their heads shaved. Then everyone will know there is no truth in these reports about you, but that you yourself are living in obedience to the law. As for the Gentile believers, we have written to them our decision that they should abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immortality.” -Acts 21:20-25

It is interesting to note that those “zealous for the law” who are a danger to Paul are referred to as Jews who “have believed,” which presumably means they were Christian. After James offers a way Paul might prove his “zeal,” one might expect Paul to protest at this point and declare that the death of Christ had meant that there was no more justification under the law, or remind him that Peter had had a vision that the foods declared unclean by Moses had now been rendered clean by God (although it did happen after “James” died). In the epistle to the Galatians, it says that 14 years after Paul’s first trip to Jerusalem, he went again “because some false brothers infiltrated our ranks to spy on the freedom we have in Christ Jesus and to make us slaves. We did not give in to them for a moment, so that the truth of the gospel might remain with you. As for those who seemed to be important -- whatever they were makes no difference to me; God does not judge by external appearance -- those men added nothing to my message.” Despite this tough talk, Acts says that Paul went along with this measure, and it didn’t even help matters.

When seven days were nearly up, some Jews from Asia (Turkey) stirred up a crowd by saying that Paul was the one teaching against the Law. They also accused him of defiling the Temple by bringing Greeks into temple area because they had previously seen Trophimus the Ephesian with him in the city. The crowd grabbed Paul and dragged him from the Temple but a Roman commander stopped them from beating him. While taking him to the barracks, the commander asked Paul if he was “the Egyptian” who led 4,000 men out into the desert. Paul tells him who he is, asking if he could speak to the crowd, to which the commander gives the unlikely answer of yes. Paul tells one of the contradictory stories about his conversion experience, which the frothing mob listens to quietly until he finishes. Then, as if on queue, they began “shouting and throwing off their cloaks and flinging dust into the air.”

The commander then ordered that Paul be flogged to learn what the mob was angry at him about, but Paul revealed that he was a Roman citizen. The commander is surprised, saying that he had to pay for his citizenship, but Paul replied that he was born a Roman citizen. Paul’s citizenship is said to have saved him before, yet as Acts frequently points out, Paul is severely beaten on multiple occasions without him bringing the subject up until it’s too late. Beatings are also spoken proudly of in 1 Corinthians without any mention of Roman citizenship. Maccoby has suggested that the incident in Acts is a case of “protesting a little too much,” and he hypothesizes that Paul did in fact purchase his Roman citizenship. He even goes so far as to suggest that it was purchased using donation money immediately before going to Jerusalem as a “safeguard” in case he would get accosted. As unlikely as that seems, there is a point to be made that Jews from Tarsus having Roman citizenship wasn’t very common. Assuming his parents were Jewish and not Gentiles, it would have meant that one of Paul’s ancestors would have had to have either fought in the army for 25 years, which Jews couldn’t do because of Sabbath requirements, or been freed as a slave and then moved to Tarsus.

Acts then says that the Roman commander decided to arrange an assembly of the Sanhedrin “to find out exactly why Paul has been accused by the Jews.” Paul starts by saying, “My brothers, I have fulfilled my duty to God in all good conscience to this day.” For this he high priest has him struck to which he responded, “God will strike you, you whitewashed wall!” and points out that he violated the Torah by having him struck. When those near him accused him of insulting the high priest, Paul claimed ignorance, and quoted Exodus, saying, “Do not speak evil about the ruler of your people.” (22:28). Then Paul, “knowing that some of them were Sadducees and the others Pharisees” purposely lured them into an argument by claiming that he was on trial because of his “hope in the resurrection of the dead.” This causes a dispute to break out, and many of the Pharisees join Paul’s side, but then “the dispute became so violent that the commander was afraid Paul would be torn to pieces by them. He ordered the troops to go down and take him away from them by force and bring him into the barracks.” The following night Paul is validated by an appearance of “the Lord,” who tells him, “Take courage! As you have testified in Jerusalem, so you must also testify in Rome.”

The next day 40 men made an oath not to eat or drink until Paul was dead. But the son of Paul’s sister warns the commander of the plot. The commander decides to dispatch 200 soldiers and 70 horsemen to escort Paul to Caeserea. Ananias arrives with a lawyer named Tertullus and accuses him of being a troublemaker and stirring up riots all over the world. They say he is one of the ringleaders of the Nazarene sect and that he desecrated the Temple. Paul argues that they can not prove that he desecrated the Temple but admits to worshipping “the God of our fathers as a follower of the Way, which they call a sect. I believe everything that agrees with the Law and that is written in the Prophets, and I have the same hope in God as these men, in the resurrection of both the righteous and the wicked.” (24:14). Paul’s dislike of the term “sect” seems to insinuate that it has a negative connotation to it, much like “cult,” a word whose European cognates are neutral and are often transposed with the word “sect.” The claim about believing “everything” that agrees with the Law is in complete contradiction with the central theme of the Pauline epistles. The claim that “It is concerning the resurrection of the dead that I am on trial before you today” also appears to be a lie. As Acts continuously points out, the Pharisees also believed in heaven and hell and their central issue was that Paul taught others not to follow the Laws of Moses. It says that Felix was “well acquainted with the Way,” which may be because of his Jewish wife, Drusilla, who along with Felix listened to Paul preach for hours, which according to Acts was only because Felix hoped to get a bribe out of him.

Felix kept Paul in prison for two years as a favor to the Jews, and was then succeeded by Festus, who granted the Jews another trial. The Jews made accusations they couldn’t prove and Paul denied doing anything wrong against the Law, the Temple, or Caesar. When Festus asked if he would be willing to be tried in Jerusalem, Paul appealed his right to be judged by Caesar. When King Agrippa II and his sister Bernice came to visit Felix, he has an audience with Paul. This Agrippa was the son of Herod Agrippa I, and the fact that the name “Agrippa” is given provides further proof that this author is different than the one who referred to Herod Agrippa I as “Herod.” His sister Bernice would become famous in 69 A.D. for having an affair with Titus, the man who sacked Jerusalem, causing the Temple to be destroyed. Paul told the Agrippa that he felt “fortunate” to stand before him, and gave him a third variation of his conversion tale and then explains that Moses and the prophets had predicted that Christ would suffer, rise from the dead, and “proclaim light to his own people and to the Gentiles,” to which Festus exclaims that all of Paul’s great learning has driven him insane. Paul responds that what he is saying “is true and reasonable,” and says that the king “is familiar with these things, and I can speak freely with him. I am convinced that none of this has escaped his notice, because it was not done in a corner.” He then asks Agrippa if he believes in the prophets, but Agrippa only says, “Do you think that in such a short time you can persuade me to be a Christian?” Paul replies, “Short time or long -- I pray God that not only you but all who are listening to me today may become what I am, except for the chains.” Agrippa gets up and leaves and agrees with Felix that Paul has done nothing wrong, saying, “This man could have been set free if he had not appealed to Caesar.”

The text then slips back into “we” form, and it is said that Paul was handed over to a centurion named Julius, who belonged to the Imperial Regiment. Taking sympathy on Paul, Julius allowed Paul access to his friends as they sailed to Sidon. Paul foretold of a disaster at sea, but the centurion followed the advice of the pilot since the dock was unsuitable to winter in. The ship got caught up in a storm, but Paul assured them that although he ship would be lost, no one would be killed. He even saves some of them by alerting the centurion that they were trying to escape with a lifeboat. Paul breaks bread with them, and mimicking the multiplication of loaves by Jesus, the crew still has plenty of grain left over to throw overboard.

The ship then ran aground on the island of Malta, which, interestingly enough, is also an island that Odysseus became shipwrecked on. The islanders showed them “unusual kindness” by building a fire and welcoming them. When Paul is bitten by a snake, the islanders say that he must be a murderer since “even though he escaped the sea, Justice has not allowed him live.” But when Paul shook off the snake and suffered no illness, the islanders mistake him for a God. As mentioned before, the theme of “surviving snake poison” is also mentioned in the long ending appended to the Gospel of Mark, giving evidence to venomous snakes being used in early Christian rituals. Paul then heals the son of the island’s chief official along with other islanders, who thank them by giving them supplies.

After three months they put out to sea again on an Alexandrian ship with the twin gods of Castor and Pollux on it. Finally they arrive in Rome and Paul is allowed to live in a rented house with a solider guarding him. There he called together the leaders of the Jews and asked to meet with them. They said that they had not received any letters from Judea or heard anyone from there speaking bad of Christians, but they knew that “people everywhere are talking against this sect.” Although some were convinced of what Paul said, others weren’t. “They disagreed among themselves and began to leave after Paul had made his final statement,” which was to say that the Holy Spirit told the truth when it said through Isaiah that “‘You will be ever hearing but never understanding; you will be ever seeing but never perceiving. For this people’s heart has become calloused….’ Therefore I want you to know that God’s salvation has been sent to the Gentiles, and they will listen!” The story ends saying that Paul spent two years in the rented house preaching “boldly and without hindrance.”

Extra-canonical tradition fills in that Paul and Peter were martyred in Rome together by Nero, but it’s surprising that Acts would not have included this considering how much space was devoted to the martyrdom of Stephen (6:8-7:60). The Epistle to the Romans is the only letter in which Paul has apparently not preceded the letter with a visit, although there is a desire expressed to visit the city and Spain as well (15:24). Eusebius of Caeserea, writing in the 300’s, was the first to suggest that Paul was beheaded by Nero, which has been dated to either 64, during the Christian persecution after the fire that Nero reportedly fiddled during, or 67. An ancient liturgical solemnity of Peter and Paul, celebrated on June 29th may record the tradition that Peter and Paul died on the same day. Other sources, such as Clement of Rome, say that Paul survived Rome and continued to “the limits of the west.” According to the Roman Catholic Church, he was interred with Peter in the catacombs of Rome and was then moved to the Basilica of Saint Paul Outside the Walls, which was founded by Emperor Constantine and expanded by Valentinian I and Theodosius I. Today it is one of the five churches considered to be the great basilicas of Rome.

Many scholars have questioned whether Acts was written before or after Luke, the prime reasons being that unlike the Gospels of Mark and Luke, Acts provides no hint of knowledge of the Second Temple’s destruction, and because the constant proclamations that God’s salvation has been sent to the Gentiles seems to go against the historical backdrop of Nero’s persecutions. Although I am unsure about whether Luke or Acts was written first, I am more confident in hypothesizing that the second part in Acts, starting with Chapter 13, was written before the first part. The second half itself seems to me to have been written around an even earlier text that was written in first person, made up of 16:9-16:18, 20:4-21:18, and 27:1-28:16. The “we” passages and supposed physician vocabulary have led many others to suppose that all of Luke-Acts really was written by “the beloved physician,” but this is generally seen to have been successfully refuted by H. J. Cadbury’s own doctoral dissertation, The Style and Literary Method of Luke. Although the name of Luke is not found anywhere in the Luke-Acts text itself, my assumption is that this first person text was originally an “Epistle of Luke,” and that is why his name later became associated with the whole compilation. The “Epistle of Luke” seems to me to be at least partly inspired by the Homer’s Odyssey. It apparently mentioned Sopater, Aristarchus, Secundus, Gaius, Timothy, Tychicus, and Trophimus, but not Barnabas, so this may be why it was necessary for an editor to include the argument to separate them.

One problem with this hypothesis is that part of the Epistle of Luke includes the reference to Philip, “one of the Seven,” which is explained as being devoted to feeding the widows of Grecian Jews instead of spreading the word. However, since Paul meets Philip the evangelist in Caeserea and Philip the disciple is also said to have preached in Samaria (8:5), it comes to reason that they were originally supposed to be one and the same person. These Seven were said to have been picked because the disciples decided “It would not be right for us to neglect the ministry of the word of God in order to wait on tables.” Six other names are given besides Philip, none of which are familiar to the rest of the New Testament except perhaps Nicolas of Antioch, “a convert to Judaism,” who Clement of Alexandria and Irenaeus identified as the founder of the Nicolatian heresy. This sect, however, was centered in Ephesus and was considered to be engaged in sinful practices when the Book of Revelation was written.

I think that Philip was originally considered to be “one of the Seven” before he became “one of the Twelve,” and that a distinction between the two groups was later edited into Chapter 6 to explain it. The Gospel of Mark is the first to identify Philip as one of the Twelve, although in 1 Corinthians, it does say that after Jesus died he appeared to “Cephas, then to the Twelve… Then he appeared to James…” (15:5), which seems to indicate that Cephas and James were not a part of that group. Since the final editor of Acts was trying to tie the background of the 12 disciples following Christ’s death (the first part) into Paul’s Gentile mission (the second part), it would only be natural to try and come up with an explanation for why Philip was both “one of the Seven” and “one of the Twelve,” and that answer was that he was a different Philip. The Twelve were the transmitters of the true Apostolic tradition, whereas the Seven Evangelists were just table-waiters. Another question much like the Philip enigma had to be taken on by the final editor as well, which was: ’Why would the Twelve still be called the Twelve if Judas had died in a fall?’ The answer given was that two more men were chosen to fill the office and the decision between them was made by casting lots (1:15).

The marked increase in the authority of the 12 disciples between Luke and Acts has been noted in another one of Crossan’s books, Who Killed Jesus?, in which he describes how in Luke, Jesus first appears to two unnamed Christians on the way to Emmaus, saying, “We are dealing in that text with a general community. The two disciples (one male, one female?) leave Jerusalem in sadness and dejection but return in joy and gladness. The presence and empowerment of Jesus remain in the community as it studies the scriptures about him and shares a meal together with him. This is not trance but exegesis, not ecstasy but Eucharist. Those two ‘missionaries’ return to ‘the eleven and their companions.’ When Jesus appears again and immediately, it is therefore to this general group and not just an inner Eleven (Judas is now gone) alone. And everything else that happens in the rest of Luke 24, up to and including Jesus’ ascension into heaven, happens to the general community.” (p.205). He compares this to the beginning of Acts, where the author claims to have previously described “in his first book… all that Jesus did and taught from the beginning until the day whern he was taken up to heaven, after giving instructions through the Holy Spirit to the apostles whom he had chosen.” As Crosson points out, “The risen Jesus now talks only to the Apostles. They and they alone receive apostolic authority and observe the ascension into heaven,” which itself, is retold in ret-con fashion.

Although Crossan only goes so far as to say that there must have been “some time between their composition,” this “emphasis shift” between the “General Community” and the “Leadership Group,” I believe, marks the evolution from a Marcionite or proto-Marcionite Gospel of the Lord to the Apostolic Church’s double-volume “biography” of Luke. I think that the final Apostolic editor of Luke-Acts, who combined an edited version of the Marcionite gospel with the two-part story of Acts, is also the same person who edited out the story of Jesus breaking seven loaves for 4,000 people with seven loaves left over, which appears is Mark as a doublet to the story of five loaves feeding 5,000 with 12 loaves left over. As explained by Jesus in Mark but left out of Luke, the numbers distributed and left over are significant (8:19), and I believe the story of the seven loaves is a reference to the seven Evangelists. Since the final editor was ultimately concerned with proving his congregation was descended from the Twelve, any reference to “the Seven” being important would only induce problems (9:10).

In 1942, an author named John Knox wrote Marcion and the New Testament, the first book to claim that Marcion’s gospel was the original Luke and that Luke-Acts was written as an Anti-Marcionite work some time in the mid 100’s. Most scholars, however, agree with the position taken by the German Professor, Udo Schnelle, who in 1998 published The History and Theology of the New Testament Writings, saying “the extensive linguistic and theological agreements and cross-references between the Gospel of Luke and the Acts indicate that both works derive from the same author” (p. 259). This would mean Luke and Acts were written by the same person and that Marcion discarded Acts and cut out the offending passages he disliked out of Luke, as Tertullian suggested he did. This would place Luke-Acts before Marcion, some time between 80 and 130. I find this hard to believe since Marcion is generally agreed to have established his canon some 30 years before Irenaeus established his, and the polemic used in these works seem to match the these two competing theologies: for the Marcionites: a myopic focus on Paul, for the Presbyters: long speeches by the apostles connecting the Old Testament with Jesus. It’s also usually agreed that, in both the Old and New Testaments, that additions to scripture are more common than subtractions. If Marcion had had problems with Luke, then it would make more sense for him to rewrite it rather than cut the language out in just such a way to make it appear to fit his theology, or as Tertullian suggests, leave some parts he should have cut out on purpose to throw investigative researchers like himself off the trail. It is my own opinion that the language similarities there are between Luke and Acts could have been left by the final editor. The Docetic instances in the Gospel of Luke and the predominant focus on Paul in the second part of Acts are both qualities that make Luke-Acts’ genetic heritage characteristically Marcionite and/or proto-Marcionite.


First Corinthians and Timothy vs. Thecla

The First Epistle to the Corinthians paints a picture of the Corinthian congregation in complete chaos. The church is said to have become divided into many separate groups, to which the epistle says, “One of you says, ‘I follow Paul’; another, ‘I follow Apollos’; another, ‘I follow Cephas [Peter?]’; still another, ‘I follow Christ.’” (1:12). There were arguments over whether anything is permissible to a Christian or whether they had to master their own desires. There were so many worshippers speaking in tongues at the same time that no one could hear or say anything, and it is insinuated that rather than impressing anyone, it was scaring newcomers off! Christians were suing one another in pagan courts. One follower was bragging about sleeping with his stepmother. Quoting Professor Bart Ehrman of the Department of Religious Studies at the University of North Carolina, “This was one messed up church.”

The letter seems to have been written to lay down some rules in order to restore order to the congregation. The epistle criticizes the Corinthians for becoming divided between those who follow Paul, those who follow Cephas, and those who follow Apollos, by asking, “Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you?” It also says the congregation should expel the immoral brother who was sleeping with his stepmother. It says that there is little value in speaking in tongues if no one understands them, so a rule is made that only three people should be allowed to speak in tongues at a time, with one person translating, and if there was no interpreter, then those people should only speak to themselves and to God (14:26). The epistle also mocks the congregation for bringing lawsuits against one another “in front of nonbelievers,” saying, “Do you not know the saints will judge the world? And if you are to judge the world, are you not competent to judge trivial cases? Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more the things of this life! Therefore, if you have disputes about such matters, appoint judges, even men of little account! I say this to shame you.” (6:1).

In regards to marriage, the First Epistle to the Corinthians says:

“Now for the matters you wrote about: It is good for a man not to marry. But since there is so much immorality, each man should have his own wife, and each woman her own husband. The husband should fulfill the marital duty to his own wife, and each woman her own husband. The wife’s body does not belong to her alone but also to her husband. In the same way, the husband’s body does not belong to him alone but also to his wife. Do not deprive each other except by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control. I say this as a concession, not as a command. I wish that all men were as I am. But each man has his own gift from God; one has this gift, another has that.” -1 Corinthians 7:1.

Such a negative emphasis on sexuality in itself may seem extreme by today’s standards, even among Christians who consider sex to be a gift from God. Yet many Gnostic and Proto-Orthodox sects, including the Marcionites, believed in complete abstinence of all its members, so its reasonable to believe that this part of the epistle was not included in the Marcionite version of Corinthians. The apocryphal Acts of Paul and Thecla, written not by a heretical sect, but by a Presbyter, also portrays Paul preaching complete abstinence. But to Tertullian, writing the book was considered a forgery and he tells how charges were made against the author, who confessed to writing it in respect for Paul, but was soundly demoted from his office. Tertullian complained that many people who read it thought it helped legitimize their belief that women could teach and baptize. Despite this, Tertullian would later join the Montanists, who not only had female teachers but also female prophets, partly because he believed the Presbyters were slow to fast and quick to remarry.

The passage goes on to say that while God, “not I,” commands that husbands and wives not divorce, it is he, “not God,” who suggests that if one spouse is an unbeliever, that they still not get a divorce, because both the unbelieving spouse and any children will be “sanctified” through them. “Otherwise your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy.” This hardly sounds like an opinion that would go unconfirmed by God. Putting all the other evidence aside for the practice of asceticism, the answer given here is unsatisfactorily wishy-washy. How could Paul possibly say these children were “sanctified” without God’s opinion on the subject? It seems highly unlikely to me that apostles in Paul’s time would have given such nuanced answers that smack of such compromise. If God commands husbands and wives not to get a divorce, then it’s only natural that they be complete answers, not generic commands that are to be parsed out by the messenger. Rather, questions that came up later brought about the need for an authoritative answer which gave Presbyters permission to marry yet at the same time left itself somewhat open to acceptance by those who knew that Paul had preached lifelong abstinence. In Darwinian terms, the practice has been shown to be an evolutionary dead end and is perhaps destined to be continuously readopted and then abandoned, as the meme must rely completely on horizontal transmission from person to person without the help in passing it on to the next generation through the bonds of children to their parents, adoption notwithstanding.

Another passage in 1 Corinthians has not won the historical conception of Paul any points with feminists:

“Now I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God. Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head. And every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head—it is just as though her head were shaved. If a woman does not cover her head, she should have her hair cut off; and if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut or shaved off, she should cover her head. A man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man. For man did not come from woman, but woman from man; neither was man created for woman, but woman for man. For this reason, and because of the angels [lusting after women], the woman ought to have a sign of authority on her head. In the Lord, however, woman is not independent of man, nor is man independent of woman. For as woman came from man, so also man is born of woman. But everything comes from God. Judge for yourselves: Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? Does not the very nature of things teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a disgrace to him, but that if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For long hair is given to her as a covering. If anyone wants to be contentious about this, we have no other practice- nor do the churches of God.” -1 Corinthians 11:3-16

The First Epistle to Timothy, regarded by most scholars as a ‘pious fraud,’ goes even further:

“A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. But women will be saved through childbearing: if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.” -1 Timothy 2:11-15

“Saved through childbearing” does not sound like the Jesus’ message to women. It doesn’t even sound like Paul, whose ‘more authentic’ Epistle to the Galatians, which says “There are no such things as Jew or Greek, slave and freeman, male and female; for you are all one person in Christ Jesus.” (3:28). If it was good for a man not to marry, why would it be an obligation for women to have children? These passages also contradict the general picture given of Paul given in Acts of Paul and Thecla. In this story, Paul is portrayed as an ascetic who preaches abstinence. Considering the popular tradition of Christian asceticism, from Marcion to Justin Martyr and Tatian, it would not be surprising if Paul also abstained from meat and wine. This in itself might present a problem with the afore-mentioned hypothesis by Maccoby that Paul originally invented the story of the First Communion, although its possible that a distinction could have made between drinking communal wine and drinking wine for pleasure. Although there is no explicit condemnation of meat or wine in Paul and Thecla, it does show a negative portrayal of two of Paul’s followers “falling away” by getting drunk, which goes in keeping with Paul’s teaching that people should forego meat and alcohol but later discredited by Irenaeus. The text is believed to have been written from around 160 to 180, but its actual contents were unknown until a copy of the Acts of Paul, taken from Coptic texts dated to the 500’s, were published in 1904.

Paul and Thecla also gives the first and only description of Paul coming from scripture. He is said to be a well-built but small, bald man with bent legs, a uni-brow, and a long nose. He’s described as being full of grace, sometimes seeming like a man, but at other times seeming like an angel. “Bent legs” seems to imply some kind of physical impairment, and in 1 Corinthians, Paul calls himself an ektroma, literally a miscarriage, stillborn, or abortion, although this is normally translated as “one untimely born” (15:8). The late 19th century author G.R.S. Mead brought attention to the fact that this is a common word used in Gnosticism to describe the creation of imperfect matter through the Sophia, perhaps symbolizing his imperfect nature as a former persecutor of Christianity. Considering the reference to “bent knees,” it could also be a reference to a physical deformity he carried with him from his birth.

The story begins with Paul fleeing Antioch with his companions Demas and Hermogenes, “who are full of hypocrisy,” yet Paul, “looking only at the goodness of God,” does them no harm and allows them to follow him. They come to the city of Iconium, in Turkey. Thecla, who has been betrothed to the “chief” nobleman of the city by her parents, takes up interest in the sermon Paul gives from outside her house. When her fiancé Thamyris and Thecla’s mother are unable to get Thecla to even turn away from her window and acknowledge them, Thamyris tries to bribe Demas and Hermogenes for information about Paul. But all they tell him is, “We cannot so exactly tell who he is; but this we know, that he deprives young men of their wives, and virgins of their husbands, by teaching, there can be no future resurrection unless you continue in chastity, and do not defile your flesh.” After getting them drunk, Thamyris conspires with them to have Paul sentenced to death by the governor Castillius, after which they would teach Thecla “that the resurrection which he speaks of is already come, and consists in our having children; and that we then arose again, when we came to the knowledge of God.” This is an unmistakable reference to the same teaching given in 1 Timothy. In fact, this may even be an ancient accusation that it was Demas or Hermogenes who forged Paul’s epistles to Timothy, or it could be a way to denigrate the allowance of sex by associating it with a known backslider. For example, the Second Epistle to Timothy, a Pastoral, says that Demas had deserted Paul “because he loved the world,” (4:10).

A mob was then roused and Paul was taken to the governor and accused of being a magician. In his defense, Paul says that God had sent him to reclaim people from sinful pleasures. “On this account, God sent his Son Jesus Christ, whom I preach, and in whom I instruct men to place their hopes as that person who only had such compassion on the deluded world, that it might not, Oh governor, be condemned, but have faith, the fear of God, the knowledge of religion, and the love of truth.” The governor has Paul put into jail until he can hear him more fully, and that night Thecla bribes the turnkey into letting her into his cell. When Thecla is found in the cell the next morning, Paul is taken back to judgment. “Thecla in the mean time lay wallowing on the ground in the prison, in that same place where Paul had sat to teach her; upon which the governor also ordered her to be brought before his judgment-seat; which summons she received with joy, and went.” This “wallowing on the ground” seems to imply that Thecla is in spiritual ecstasy, rutting on the ground like an animal in heat.

The men, outraged as Paul, call for him to be executed as a magician. Thecla’s mother calls on the governor to burn her daughter so that other women will learn to avoid such practices. The governor decides to exile Paul from the city and to burn Thecla. When the young virgin is tied naked to the stake, she “like a lamb in the wilderness” looks for Paul. “And as she was looking upon the multitude, she saw the Lord Jesus in the likeness of Paul, and said to herself, Paul is come to see me in my distressed circumstances. And she fixed her eyes upon him; but he instantly ascended up to heaven, while she looked on him.” Just as she is about the be burnt, a massive hailstorm materializes as an earthquake simultaneously strikes. Although many in the city die, Thecla is unharmed, even by the fire burning around her.

After fasting for six days in a cave, Paul and another companion, Onesiphorus, send a boy to the city to get some bread, and he brings her back to them. Thecla comes up behind Paul while he is still praying that the fire does her no harm. Surprising Paul, she cries out thanks for God, to which Paul jumps up and joins her in thanks:

“And there prevailed among them in the cave an entire affection to each other; Paul, Onesiphorus, and all that were with them being filled with joy. They had five loaves, some herbs and water, and they solaced each other in reflections upon the holy works of Christ. Then said Thecla to Paul, ‘If you be pleased with it, I will follow you wherever you go.’ He replied to her, ‘Persons are now much given to fornication, and you being handsome, I am afraid lest you should meet with greater temptation than the former, and should not withstand, but be overcome by it.’ Thecla replied, ‘Grant me only the seal of Christ, and no temptation shall affect me.’ Paul answered, ‘Thecla, wait with patience, and you shall receive the gift of Christ.’ Then Paul sent back Onesiphorus and his family to their own home, and taking Thecla along with him, went for Antioch; And as soon as they came into the city, a certain Syrian named Alexander, a magistrate in the city, who had done many considerable services for the city during his magistracy, saw Thecla and fell in love with her, and endeavored by many rich presents to engage Paul in his interest. But Paul told him, ‘I know not the woman of whom you speak, nor does she belong to me.’ But he being a person of great power in Antioch, seized her in the street and kissed her; which Thecla would not bear, but looking about for Paul, cried out in a distressed loud tone, ‘Force me not, who am a stranger; force me not, who am a servant of God; I am one of the principal persons of Iconium, and was obliged to leave that city because I would not be married to Thamyris.’ Then she laid hold on Alexander, tore his coat, and took his crown off his head, and made him appear ridiculous before all the people. But Alexander, partly as he loved her, and partly being ashamed of what had been done, led her to the governor, and upon her confession of what she had done, he condemned her to be thrown among the beasts.”

A woman named Trifina, who just recently lost her daughter, keeps Thecla in her home until the beasts can be brought in. Then Thecla is thrown, naked, to a lioness, but it licks her feet, so she is allowed to go back to Trifina while more animals are brought in. That night, Trifina has a dream of her daughter asking to make Thecla her replacement, and have Thecla pray for her so that she could be translated into a state of happiness. She did this and when Thecla was thrown to a much larger array of animals, the she-lion protects her, killing a bear and another lion but dying in the process. This saddened the women of Antioch, who had been so disgusted by the governor’s unjust judgment that they began calling for the whole city to be destroyed. After praying, Thecla turns around and sees a pit of water, deciding now of all times was the fit time to baptize herself. The women (even the governor!) cry out to Thecla not to throw herself into the pit of man-eating seals, but when she dives in, a great fire envelops her, killing the seals. When she rises up out of the water, the light is so great that they couldn’t see her nakedness. More animals are sent but they fall asleep and when Alexander has her drawn by horses, the fire around her burns the ropes and the people find her sitting there as if nothing had happened. Alexander gives up and the governor gives Thecla her clothes back, to which she replies, “May that God who clothed me when I was naked among the beasts, in the day of judgment clothe your soul with the robe of salvation.”

She then heads west and meets up with Paul again, returns to her home in Iconia and tries to convert her mother. She then goes back to the cave where she found Paul and weeps before God. Led by a cloud (similar to Moses), she went east, braving temptations, gaining converts, healing the sick, and casting out demons in Seleucia. Many years pass and she does such a good job that the physicians of the city get together, and believing that she is getting her powers as a virgin in the service of the goddess Diana (who the Greeks called Artemis). So they pay some drunkards to rape the now elderly apostle. When the men come for her, Thecla knows who they are and yet opens the door for them, calling out for God to save her. God answers her, opening up the rock wall and bidding her to hurry inside. Thecla runs inside, and the men catch hold of her hood, but only because God allowed them to in order that it would remain on earth as a religious relic for those visiting the place where she was “translated.” Here the story ends, making a distinction between how old Thecla was and how many years she had “lived.” Being 18 years old when she was converted, she “lived 72 years; so that she was 90 years old when the Lord translated her.”

The Acts of Paul and Thecla were part of a larger work known as the Acts of Paul, which was considered canonical as late as the early 200’s by St. Hippolytus of Rome. The Acts of Paul, believed to have been written by the same Galatian priest who wrote the Thecla story, also included a 3 Corinthians, an Epistle of the Corinthians to Paul, as well as various tales such as the healing of Hermocrates from dropsy, the strife of the Ephesian beasts, and the death of Paul at the hands of Nero. It is said that Paul prayed to the east, towards Jerusalem, in his Hebrew tongue before he quietly offering his head, and that when it was cut off, “milk spurted from the cloak of the soldier,” causing those present to believe. When Paul appears to Nero in a vision just as he predicted he would, he warned “the wretched man” of the punishment he would receive “not many days hence.” Disturbed by the vision, he released two other prisoners, Patroclus and Barsabas. Titus and Luke go and visit Paul’s grave, and when Longus the prefect and Cestus the centurion come by, the two begin to run away in fear until Longus and Cestus stop them and that they “pursue you not for death but for life,” because they saw Paul praying next to them. After this, Titus and Luke rejoice and give them “the seal in the Lord.”

The story of Thecla was widely circulated throughout Eastern Church and Thecla became an role model for women who chose the ascetic lifestyle. Her cult developed in Seleucia, Iconium, and Nicomedia and then spread to Europe in the 300’s. She is also a saint in the Roman Catholic and Greek Orthodox churches, but has since been overshadowed by several other saints with the same name.

In their book, In the Search of Paul, Crossan and Reed also make a case for the sexist passages in the Pauline epistles as being forgeries. Crossan and Reed’s main theme is that like Jesus, Paul was followed a tradition of Jewish Cynicism, and that he denied both the imperialism of Rome and the conversion of Gentiles to Judaism. “Paul opposed Rome with Christ against Caesar, not because that empire was particularly unjust or oppressive, but because he questioned the normalcy of civilization itself, since civilization has always been imperial, that is, unjust and oppressive.” (p. x). They argue that by calling Jesus the Son of God and Savior, Paul and the Christians he taught was a calculated challenge deliberately denying Caesar his highest title as a means to contrast the Roman principle of “peace through victory” with Jesus’ message of “peace through justice.”

In the preface to the book, they make mention of a small cave, high above the ancient of Ephesus in Turkey, discovered in 1906 on the northern slopes of Bülbül Dag. To the right of the entrance, beneath layers of plaster, Karl Herold of the Austrian Archaeological Institute uncovered two ancient Byzantine paintings from the 500’s of Paul and Thecla with their hands raised in teaching gestures. However, Thecla’s eyes and upraised hand have been etched out, symbolically destroying the authority she once had, while Paul’s image was left intact. Crossan and Reed take this as encapsulating their belief that the authentic and historic Paul preached sexual equality and that it was replaced with the sexist Paul of the current canon. The First Epistle to Timothy is also indicative of the unequal Paul, who tells women to “keep quiet and keep pregnant.” But Crossan and Reed take this to mean that Corinthians is only partially forged, saying that “a later follower of Paul inserted in 1 Corinthians that it is shameful for women to speak in church, but correct to ask their husbands for explanations at home (14:33-36).” (p. xiii). I take it to mean that Origen was correct in saying that Paul never wrote any extended letters. Crossan and Reed also point out that up until the 1300’s, commentators identified the apostle Junias from the Epistle to the Romans as a female (16:7), and only afterward was it alleged to be a shortened form of the Junianus. Crossan has also said in a number of his books that he believes that the original tradition was for two Christians, one man, one woman, to travel together spreading the word.

Ancient Christian cave grotto above Ephesus, Turkey
On the wall are Byzantine paintings of Paul and St. Thecla dated to the 500’s A.D.


Thecla’s eyes and fingers have been defaced while Paul’s has been left undamaged
Pictures taken from In Search of Paul, by John Dominic Crossan and Jonathan L. Reed


Reconstruction of the Byzantine fresco