Simon Magus, The Early Church, and the Church of God

 

Earliest known image of John the Apostle – opponent of Gnostics

The Persistent Mystique of Unorthodoxy

Gnosticism and Christianity at Odds

By NeoDromos

 

One of the great insults to the Christian church is that it came into existence as a subversion of the true church by Simon Magus, a Samaritan Gnostic, and is therefore utterly pagan.  Simon Magus is a topic in the Mystery of the Ages (MOA) written by Herbert W. Armstrong (HWA) where Simon is described as the innovator of what is known in the Christian movement as “cheap grace.”  While Armstrongism devotes little time to the Patristics and other ancient Christian personae, Simon Magus receives much attention in some of the Armstrongist publications.     HWA claims that Satan started his “great false church” through Simon Magus (MOA, p. 51).   This opinion piece reviews the origin of these ideas about the role of Simon Magus and proposes a “learning tool” for evaluating denominational affinities with Gnosticism.  

The Willful Samaritan

In my research on Simon Magus, I have encountered nothing that would make me think that Simon had anything to do with the founding of Christianity as it is now known.   So I went to Armstrongist literature to try to discover why this belief concerning Simon as founder is held.  I discovered that Ernest L. Martin, when he was an Armstrongist, wrote an extensive series in the Good News Magazine about Simon Magus.  I believe this is where HWA got his comments in MOA about Simon.  After some review, I was not impressed with the scholarship shown in Martin’s series.   All historians interpret data but sometimes the interpretation can be gratuitous and forced.  And the forced interpretation is what I found in Martin’s writing.

As an example, I looked for Martin’s explanation in particular as to how Simon usurped the First Century church, leading it off into grave error.   I found Martin’s assertions about this genesis in a section titled “Catholic Church Accepts SIMON MAGUS’ Teaching.”  The idea that Martin presents is that the followers of Simon flooded into the church bringing with them a toxic theology.  And their numbers were such that they completely overran the church.  (Note that the term Catholic Church at this time means the broad or whole church and is not the same as the modern Roman Catholic Church denomination.)  Martin wrote:

“We have the record of history which tells us that Simon's teaching spread like wildfire — especially in Rome where he was honoured as a god. In fact, after going there he made that city his headquarters. But let us recall that the followers of Simon called themselves TRUE Christians.

“Nonetheless the Simonians were very much around — this time with the name of "Christian." And we have the exact testimony of Eusebius himself (325 A.D.) that these people were flocking into the Catholic Church.”

First, the “record of history” he refers to has no citation so I could not check it.   Second, the use of the word “flocking” which suggests a large number of people is not supported.  It is just creative rhetoric.  And, third, we will see shortly that “exact testimony” of Eusebius suffers also. Martin states further:

 “Notice what Eusebius says, after stating that Simon Magus in the days of the Apostles received baptism and feigned Christian belief: "And what is more surprising, the same thing IS DONE EVEN TO THIS DAY by those who follow HIS most impure heresy. For they, after the manner of their forefather, SLIPPING INTO THE CHURCH, like a pestilential and leprous disease GREATLY AFFLICT THOSE [a great number of people] into whom they …“

The words “greatly afflict those” in all capitals are construed by Martin to mean a “great number.”   The words in brackets are not in the original text – they were added by Martin.  This “greatly afflict those” phrase does not require his bracketed interpretation.  Interpreting this as a phrase of intensity seems much more plausible.  In fact, Martin quotes earlier “Justin tells us that some were still going by the parent name in his day (152 A.D.). But by the time of Origen (220 A.D.), he states that there were hardly 30 people in the world which went by the parent name.”  This is a problem for Martin whose essential argument pivots on numbers of people.

And what was the reaction of the church?  Martin describes it in this way:

“Eusebius later maintains that the chief troublemakers were being expelled from the Catholic Church. But how could they expel all of them? Almost the whole church by this time was affected.”

The last two sentences are speculative and based on Martin’s foregoing attempt to make the followers of Simon seem very numerous.   What we really have as data, setting aside Martin’s creative interpretation, is the fact that some trouble-making followers of Simon showed up at church and this started a program of expulsion by church authorities.  Eusebius is supposed to have verified that Simon’s followers were persistent and numerous but we have seen that is Martin’s rendering. This does not sound like the inflection point in theology that Martin was looking for.  

My conclusion is that Martin’s series contains many declarations critical to his thesis that are not underpinned by footnoted sources and this leaves the reader wondering where the ideas came from.   On rebuttal, Martin, were he alive, may have a defense for all of this but what this appeal would be is not apparent from what he has written.   

Homework – Fill in the Blank

 Although the idea that Simon Magus founded Christianity is facetious, Gnosticism was a thorn in the side of the early church.  And it is interesting that some of the prominent Gnostic movements were Judaizing movements.  And the necessity for the Epistle to the Galatians becomes clear.  

Perhaps, your denomination has residual Gnostic tendencies.  This exercise involves reflection on that possibility.   Imagine your denomination occupying the far right column of the table below.  You judge how the attributes of your denomination should be defined for each row. A Christian church will be at great variance with the two middle columns.  And the idea is to respond with principle and not detail.   For instance, there is the attribute “Connection with Circumcision Party.”  No Christian or putatively Christian group believes that now circumcision is required.  But there are some that do not recognize the fact that there is a New Covenant and under the New Covenant some laws were rendered spiritual by Jesus.  For instance, circumcision of the flesh is now circumcision of the heart.  In logical principle, this might be called the Circumcision Error.  This exercise may help answer the question, “Where do we really find similarities to the Gnostic ideas of Simon Magus today?”  I have used the Gnosticism of Cerinthus and the semi-Gnosticism of the Ebionites as good representatives of the Gnostic movement.   Gnosticism contains some really bizarre beliefs.  I have used some beliefs where the comparison with modern-day religions is possible. 

Analyze Your Own Denomination
Attributes	Cerinthian Gnosticism (Jewish sect)	Ebionism (Jewish sect; Strong affinity with Gnosticism)	Put the name of your church here and fill in the blocks below
Characteristics of Creator.  Anthropomorphic?  Immanent and Transcendent?	The Cosmos were created by a Demi-urge who had the characteristics of a created being; Creator was not transcendent. The implication of this is that they believed literally the anthropomorphic language describing God in the Old Testament.	Equated Yahweh of the OT to a Demi-urge. The implication of this is that they believed literally the anthropomorphic language describing God in the Old Testament.
Law of Moses; Salvation by Works	“…strict adherence to both Written and Oral Torah Mosaic Law for the attainment of salvation”	“… the Ebionites insisted on the necessity of following the written Law of Moses alone (without the Oral Law)”
Grace	Misunderstood doctrine of Grace; salvation not by grace but by gnosis or knowledge of God	Misunderstood doctrine of grace; Church Fathers claimed they had an improper fixation on the Law of Moses
Status of Jesus	Jesus categorically subordinate to God. Denied Jesus was co-equal with God.	Jesus categorically subordinate to God. Denied Jesus was co-equal with God.
The Sabbath	Observed the seventh day	Observed the seventh day
Eschatology	Believed in a form of Millenarianism	Believed in the coming Kingdom of God
The Trinity	Rejected the Trinity	Rejected the Trinity
Connection with Circumcision Party	In principle, Cerinthians advocated a literal Torah and rejected the enactment of the New Covenant with the transformations Jesus made; originated in the First Century Judaizing movement; either derived from or related to the Circumcision Party; required that converts be circumcised and keep the Law of Moses	In principle, Ebionites advocated a literal Torah and rejected the enactment of the New Covenant with the transformations Jesus made; required that converts be circumcised and keep the Law of Moses; Ebionites may have originated as dissidents in opposition to the decisions of the Jerusalem Council
Opposition to established Christian authority	Strong opposition to the Apostle John; Some think John wrote his Gospel to counter Cerinthus	Regarded the Apostle Paul to be an apostate
Focus on a human leader	Cerinthus, likely a Jew born in Egypt	Epiphanius recounts that there was an Ebion. Others say there was not.
Elevation of non-canonical literature; Use of parochial writings	Used the Gospel of Cerinthus	Used an unorthodox version of the Gospel of Matthew; it was identical to the Gospel of Cerinthus

 

Conclusion

The idea that modern Christianity is enslaved to the ancient ideas of Simon Magus is ill-conceived.  The study of scripture in modern times has been extensive and involves ancient languages, archaeology, customs, culture, archaeogenetics, hermeneutics, the accumulated wisdom of the Christian movement, and many other disciplines and resources.  Dogma is developed from scripture, not from the arcane writings of a First Century Samaritan Gnostic.  What Simon Magus actually believed can be found in Irenaeus and if you scan through this you will find that it bears no relationship to Christian dogma.   (https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103123.htm)  So if Simon Magus did try to derail Christianity, he was profoundly unsuccessful.  On the other hand, Gnosticism broadly was a plague on the early church and it yet survives in spirit if not direct historical connection.  With a little homework, as proposed above, you can be the judge of this yourself. 

Sources:

Armstrong, Herbert W.  Mystery of the Ages, pp. 52-53. 

Catholic Encyclopedia, New Advent, online, article on Simon Magus.

Erickson, Millard.  Systematic Theology, p. 765.

Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, chapter titled Against Heresies (Book I, Chapter 23)

Martin, Ernest L.  Series of articles in Good News Magazine titled “Simon Magus Series,” 1964.

Wikipedia articles on Cerinthus, Ebionites and Gnosticism