Show me, if you can, whether Peter and Paul were scholars. But you cannot; for they were ordinary men and unlettered.[7] Just as Christ, when He sent His disciples out into the world, showed His power first to them in Palestine, saying, _When I sent you without purse, and scrip, and shoes, did you want anything?_ Afterwards He charged them to have a scrip and a purse, and so He did in this case. For that which was aimed at was to show the power of Christ, not that the lack of external accomplishments should cause those who approached to be rejected from the faith. Now, whenever heathens accuse the disciples of being unlearned, let us be even louder than they in our accusations. Let no one say that Paul was skilful, but praising great men amongst them for their skill, and those remarkable for their clever speeches, let us say that all of ours are unlearned. We shall not a little overthrow them on this side too, so brilliant will be the victory. I have said these things because I once heard a Christian making himself ridiculous in discussion with a heathen, and each in their fight against the other destroying his own side. That which the Christian should have said the heathen said, and that which it would have been natural for the heathen to say the Christian put forward. For, Paul and Plato forming the subject of dispute, the heathen, on the one hand, tried to show that Paul was uneducated and unlearned, and, on the other, the Christian, out of simplicity, was all eager to prove that Paul was a better reasoner than Plato. Thus the heathen gained the victory, as this consideration prevailed. For, if Paul _had_ been a better dialectician than Plato, many would naturally have used the argument that he succeeded through his skilful speech rather than by grace. So the Christian’s argument told for the heathen, and the heathen’s for the Christian. For if Paul was untaught and still conquered Plato, as I have said, it was a triumphant victory. The unlearned Paul, taking Plato’s disciples, convinced them and drew them to himself. Hence, it is evident that the Gospel was not preached by human wisdom, but by the grace of God. In order, then, that we may not encounter the same defeat, nor make ourselves ridiculous when we are thus in discussion with heathens, let us condemn the Apostles as unlearned: this very condemnation is praise. And when they tell us that the Apostles were rustic, let us admit and confess that they were untaught, and unlearned, and poor, and needy, and unintelligent, and obscure. This is no blasphemy of the Apostles, but their glory, that, being what they were, they appeared more famous than the whole world. Those very unlearned, rustic, untaught men beat down men wise in their conceits, powerful men, tyrants, men who were enjoying riches and glory and all outward goods, as if they had not been men at all. Whence it is clear that the power of the Cross was great, and that