Marcion, who also held the doctrine of the two opposed principles of Good and Evil, asserted that there was a third Deity between the two—one of a “mixed nature”—the God of the Jews, the Creator (with his Host) of the lower, or our, World. Though ever at war with the Evil Principle, this intermediate Being was nevertheless also opposed to the Good Principle, whose place and title he coveted. Thus Simon was only the son of his time, a religious Reformer like so many others, and an Adept among the Kabalists. The Church, to which a belief in his actual existence and great powers is a necessity—in order the better to set off the “miracle” performed by Peter and his triumph over Simon—extols unstintingly his wonderful magic feats. On the other hand, Scepticism, represented by scholars and learned critics, tries to make away with him altogether. Thus, after denying the very existence of Simon, they have finally thought fit to merge his individuality entirely in that of Paul. The anonymous author of _Supernatural Religion_ assiduously endeavoured to prove that by Simon Magus we must understand the Apostle Paul, whose _Epistles_ were secretly as well as openly calumniated and opposed by Peter, and charged with containing “dysnoëtic learning.” Indeed this seems more than probable when we think of the two Apostles and contrast their characters. The Apostle of the Gentiles was brave, outspoken, sincere, and very learned; the Apostle of Circumcision, cowardly, cautious, insincere, and very ignorant. That Paul had been, partially at least, if not completely, initiated into the theurgic mysteries, admits of little doubt. His language, the phraseology so peculiar to the Greek philosophers, certain expressions used only by the Initiates, are so many sure ear‐marks to that supposition. Our suspicion has been strengthened by an able article entitled “Paul and Plato,” by Dr. A. Wilder, in which the author puts forward one remarkable and, for us, very precious observation. In the _Epistles to the Corinthians_, he shows Paul abounding with “expressions suggested by the initiations of Sabazius and Eleusis, and the lectures of the (Greek) philosophers. He (Paul) designates himself an _idiotes_—a person unskilful in the Word, but not in the _gnosis_ or philosophical learning. ‘We speak wisdom among the perfect or initiated,’ he writes, _even_ the _hidden wisdom_, ‘not the wisdom of this world, nor of the Archons of this world, but divine wisdom in a mystery, secret—which _none of the Archons of this world knew_.’ ”(203)