The Gnostic Paul is an excellent resource for learning about gnostic Christianity, in fact I would say it's one of the most important resources, however it's not an easy text to read as it's definitely an intermediate-advanced level book. There's a couple key considerations to keep in mind when using this book:

1.Elaine Pagels was referencing the original Koine-Greek New Testament, therefore the verses quoted in The Gnostic Paul typically have a slightly different wording than the same verses from the more recent KJV or NIV translations. As you've seen throughout this thread, the esoteric readings of verses are heavily dependent on accurate translations of the original syntax and vocabulary.
-When ranking the various translations from most accurate to least accurate, the original Koine-Greek NT is obviously the most accurate, followed by the KJV and finally the NIV. In spite of the NIV being the least accurate, I often quote passages from it because it's more readable than the KJV. For my own purposes, I typically use the KJV but if I were more knowledgeable in Koine-Greek then I would use that instead. Sometimes though the KJV translation is insufficient or inaccurate and in those cases I use this Greek interlinear bible:

https://scripture4all.org/OnlineInterli ... _Index.htm

2.Sometimes the exegeses appear to be incorrect or strained, but if you dig deeper and consider things like the exegetical history of the passage, possible nuances in the vocabulary and most importantly, read the entire passage (conventionally and esoterically) within the context of the specific chapter or book then the exegeses end up ringing true.

3.This book was written in 1975, long before the age of the internet and easily accessible information, as such it feels anemic in certain areas and doesn't adequately explain things. Granted, Elaine Pagels wrote this book from a strictly scholarly perspective and had certain constraints when writing it. My impression from reading the prologue is that she was primarily focused on compiling all the fragments of the gnostic exegeses of Paul's letters from the corpus of patristic literature with only a secondary focus on robustly reconstructing/explaining them, therefore The Gnostic Paul isn't a fully comprehensive resource, but it was never intended to be in the first place. Instead, this book should be considered as a useful starting point that can help orient us with general Valentinian exegetical guidelines.
-One of my purposes in this thread is to supplement and clarify the various exegeses mentioned in The Gnostic Paul, which is much easier to do in the year 2024 with the abundant information provided through the internet. Ideally I would like to fully exegete and/or contextualize all of Paul's letters (thus completing in spirit what Elaine Pagels originally started), but realistically speaking this is a massive undertaking. Currently I estimate I can decipher approximately 70% of the content in Paul's letters, however I'm dealing with the following obstacles:

• Does Paul's cipher apply to the letters not mentioned in The Gnostic Paul? My suspicion is that in accordance with the NT categorization schema I previously outlined, the first seven books of Paul (Romans to Colossians) are progressively more and more pneumatic while the last seven books of Paul (1 Thessalonians to Hebrews) are progressively more and more psychic*, thus containing less or even no coded information. This is probably true for the pastoral letters (1 & 2 Timothy and Titus) and Philemon, but isn't the case at all with Hebrews. Regarding 1 & 2 Thessalonians, I've discovered the conventional exegetical history claims thematic links between 1 Corinthians & 1 Thessalonians and 2 Corinthians & 2 Thessalonians. So it's possible the Thessalonians are intended to be psychic counterparts of the (extremely) pneumatic Corinthians, although I don't think this is the only possibility.

• For the Pauline letters we do have exegeses from, are we expected to apply Paul's cipher to the entire letter or only parts of it? I currently suspect the latter. From what I've seen, some passages seem like they should be taken at face value with the caveat they're only addressed towards psychic readers. One thing I've discovered is that the surrounding text of a passage/verse usually provides clues about how it should be read. I frequently ask myself questions like, "what audience is Paul talking to?" or, "what's Paul's overarching purpose here?". A good example of this is with the code words "Jews" and "Gentiles". Sometimes Paul's using these words literally and other times metaphorically. I've observed that when Paul's talking about literal Jews/Gentiles he'll explicitly say so or it will otherwise implied by the context. Here's one example:

  Ephesians 2:11
  Wherefore remember, that ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands;

  On a related note, a general tip for exegeting Paul's letters is being familiar with the platonic form/matter distinction and recognizing the various metaphors used to express it, some examples include: male/female, husband/wife, spirit/flesh etc etc. If you spot these kinds of dichotomies in the text, there's probably a hidden meaning there.

Exegesis of a passage from 1 Corinthians 1
In the previous post I provided a detailed exegesis of a passage from 1 Corinthians 2. In this post I want to provide a detailed exegesis from the preceding chapter which will help contextualize and support the original exegesis. Note, there's already an exegesis of this passage in The Gnostic Paul (pages 54-56), however I'm rewriting it with additional information to make its meaning clearer. For your convenience, here's a link to the passage to compare with while reading along: https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?s ... ersion=KJV

1 Corinthians 1:17
For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach (euangelizesthai) the gospel: not with wisdom (sophia) of words (logos), lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.

Paul's implying he was sent to preach the psychic gospel (and not the pneumatic one) to a psychic audience, suggesting that although the cross of Christ is a single message, it must be conveyed differently towards different audiences to be effective.
-Paul claims he's preaching the gospel, but not with wisdom (Sophia) of words (logos), which is a code phrase for the pneumatic/spiritual message of Christianity (recall that speech/logos is associated with spirit in 1 Corinthians 2:4).
-The word originally used for preach in the Koine-Greek version is "euangelizesthai", which doesn't carry the same nuance as "kerygma".
-The word logos in this verse is different than the philosophical logos. I wanted to clarify this since the Valentinians also talk about logos in the platonic sense.

1 Corinthians 1:18
For the preaching (logos) of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.

The KJV misleadingly translates the word "logos" as "preaching". For reference here's the original Koine-Greek version of 1 Corinthians: https://scripture4all.org/OnlineInterli ... f/1co1.pdf
-In the first clause Paul continues referring to the pneumatic Christians, using "the logos of the cross" as a code phrase for the higher pneumatic gospel, saying that it's foolishness to those who are perishing (psychic Christians)**. Although this is a new verse, the logic from the previous one should run together like this:

For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach (euangelizesthai) the gospel: not with wisdom (sophia) of words (logos), lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect. For the preaching (logos) of the cross is to them that perish (psychic Christians) foolishness

-In the following clause, Paul signals he's referring to the psychics now by talking as if he were one of them. This can be seen where Paul mentions "us" being saved by the "power" of God (recall that "power" is associated with psychics in 1 Corinthians 1:24).
-Note the juxtaposition of "perishing" and "being saved", both in relation to psychic Christians. While this initially seems contradictory, it's a matter of perspective. From the enlightened pneumatic perspective, psychic Christians are perishing because they don't understand the higher truth of Christianity, however from the limited psychic perspective (which cannot perceive higher truth), they see themselves as being saved, which is relatively true, just not in relation to the pneumatic perspective. Keeping this in mind, observe how the second clause is an inverted mirror image of the first clause:

For the logos (associated with spirit) of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.

The implication is that psychics can't directly understand the higher spiritual "logos", rather they only understand it as the power of God (which is related to "kerygma").

1 Corinthians 1:19-21
19 For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent. 20 Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? 21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching (kerygmatos) to save them that believe.

This passage is talking about the "wisdom of this world", which is actually a reference to Jewish law. This interpretation is reinforced by the phrase "where is the scribe?", which is referring to those who are knowledgable about the law.
-Recall the NT is using a caricaturized version of Judaism as a symbolic foil for the spiritual message of Christianity. The general idea being that Jewish law metaphorically represents the strict literalist mindset of "the letter of the law" (visible matter) while Christianity metaphorically represents the relaxed figurative mindset of "the spirit of the law" (invisible forms). I strongly suspect part of the reason the gnostics used the demiurge myth (which they associated with Jewish law, page 55 in The Gnostic Paul) was as a reminder to read references to Jewish law figuratively and not literally. Recall that in Plato's Timaeus, it's the demiurge that's responsible for creating the visible world of matter, which is symbolically consistent with the superficial literalist mindset suggested by "the letter of the law".
-With that in mind, this passage is implying that even the intermediate partially spiritual psychic gospel is better for understanding God (spirit) than the strict matter oriented mindset symbolically represented by Jewish law.

1 Corinthians 1:22-23
22 For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom: 23 But we preach (kerygma) Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness

"Jews" (psychic Christians) understand things literally while "Greeks" (pneumatic Christians) understand things symbolically. Subsequently, the psychic preaching of Christ crucified impedes the limited understanding of psychics who understand it literally, while it seems foolish to pneumatics who understand its true symbolic meaning.
-Note the conventional reading of this passage associates Greeks with foolishness, which is the same word associated with those perishing in 1 Corinthians 1:18, therefore the psychic interpretation of this entire passage is that pagan Greeks are perishing because they think Christianity is foolishness. However, the presence of the word "foolishness" in different verses is a red herring intended to throw off uninitiated readers. What really matters is how "logos" and "kerygma" are used in relation to "foolishness":

pneumatic teaching => 1 Corinthians 1:18, "For the message (logos) of the cross is to them that perish (psychic Christians) foolishness"
-The higher pneumatic message of Christianity is foolishness to psychic Christians

psychic teaching => 1 Corinthians 1:23, "But we preach (kerygma) Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks (pneumatic Christians) foolishness"
-The lower psychic message of Christianity is foolishness to pneumatic Christians.

1 Corinthians 1:24-25
24 But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God. 25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men.

This verse assigns "Jews" (psychic Christians) to the power of God and "Greeks" (pneumatic Christians) to the wisdom of God, with the following verse reminding the reader these designations are metaphorical and not literal by saying that the foolishness and weakness of God (spirit) is stronger than that of men (matter).
-The word "called" is actually a code word for psychic Christians. The idea is that psychic Christians are "called" while pneumatic Christians are "chosen". However in this verse it's being used normally since it's used with the qualifier "both", although I do get the impression Paul is foreshadowing his usage of the code word "called" as you'll see in the next verse. In the original Koine-Greek version the word for "called" is right next to "Jews" which suggests a greater affinity between these two words compared to "Greeks". It feels like a kind of grammatical wordplay going on that doesn't really translate into English.

1 Corinthians 1:26
For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called:

In this verse the words "calling" and "called" are used, which as noted previously are code words for psychic Christians.
-The psychic interpretation of this verse implies that many Christians come from humble backgrounds, who are literally simple, weak and undignified according to a literal reading of "after the flesh". The pneumatic interpretation understands it as specifically talking about psychic Christians, who are metaphorically simple, weak and undignified in accordance with a metaphorical reading of "after the flesh", only suggesting that their outlook is fleshly/carnal and not their literal physical/material disposition.
-Note that Paul deliberately emphasizes the psychic/pneumatic perspectives by placing the phrase "after the flesh" (psychic orientation) only after "wise men" ("wisdom", that is, pneumatic orientation) and not after the other attributes like "mighty" and "noble".

1 Corinthians 1:27-28
27 But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty; 28 And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are:

This passage uses the code word "chosen" (referencing pneumatic Christians) multiple times, in contrast with the previous passage which used "calling"/"called" (referencing psychic Christians).
-Notice how often "world" (a reference to the sensible realm of matter) is used in this passage, which is what psychic Christians understand most easily because of their superficial, carnal orientation. The implication is that the foolish, weak, base and despised things of this world only superficially appear that way to psychic Christians since the "world" only pertains to the false material appearances that can be sensed, but not the deeper, true spiritual reality, which they cannot fully detect.
-In the previous passage Paul was talking about psychic Christians (who are called) which are metaphorically ignorant, weak and undignified because of their carnal/fleshly perspective; in this passage Paul is talking about pneumatic Christians (who are chosen) which superficially appear foolish, weak, base and despised to the limited worldly perspective of psychic Christians, but in true spiritual terms are actually wise, mighty and noble. This relates to what I said earlier in this thread about the relationship between psychic and pneumatic Christians being represented by the idea of the many to the few. In a similar fashion, 1 Corinthians 1:26 implies the many psychic Christians that are spiritually simple, weak and undignified while 1 Corinthians 1:27-28 implies the few pneumatic Christians that are actually spiritually wise, mighty and noble (the code word "chosen" signals the reader to invert the logic of verse 26 so it implies: "the pneumatics are the few wise men after the spirit, few mighty, few noble").
-In verse 28, "things that are not" refers to spirit (which is invisible and unmanifest, hence "it's not"), while "things that are" refers to matter (which is visible and manifest) and can be "brought to nought".

1 Corinthians 1:29
That no flesh should glory in his presence.

This suggests those who perceive according to the flesh cannot understand God who is spirit.

*Ironically if you look at the eight Pauline letters which Elaine Pagels was able to recover gnostic exegeses from (Romans, 1 & 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians and Hebrews) then you'll see that they match the first seven letters of Paul in the NT with the exception of Hebrews. The fact that Elaine Pagels was unable to find any exegeses from the remaining six letters of Paul suggests that the gnostics weren't using these books or that they were intended for a different (psychic) audience, which supports the schema I proposed. Although I want to clarify I only think this schema is generally correct, I suspect there's still a deeper logic to how Paul's letters are arranged.

**In anticipation of hypothetical protests from orthodox Christians that Paul wouldn't be speaking in coded language since it's unethical/lying/deceptive I want to point out again that this is scripturally supported while also expanding on this point:

Luke 8:9-10
9His disciples asked him what this parable meant. 10He said, “The knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of God has been given to you, but to others I speak in parables, so that,
“ ‘though seeing, they may not see;
though hearing, they may not understand.’

What's a parable? It's a hidden teaching, which is no different than what Paul is doing. There is however one passage in 2 Corinthians which appears to contradict the idea of Paul speaking in code, but it itself is classic cleverly worded Pauline doublespeak:

2 Corinthians 4:2-3
2 But have renounced the hidden things of dishonesty, not walking in craftiness, nor handling the word of God deceitfully; but by manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God. 3 But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost:

Paul is a pneumatic teacher which is related to the concept of spirit/form. Platonically speaking, spirit/form is considered as perfect, eternal and "true", meanwhile matter is considered as imperfect, temporary and "false". Spirit is intrinsically hidden and true while matter intrinsically hides things and is false. Therefore, spirit and matter can both be related to "hiddenness", but in different ways. This is the same concept mentioned in Luke 8:10:

‘though seeing, they may not see;
though hearing, they may not understand.’

Therefore although 2 Corinthians 4:2 superficially contradicts the idea of Paul using coded language to teach a spiritual message, Paul isn't talking about literal dishonesty, rather Paul is using dishonesty in a philosophical/platonic sense to refer to a psychic material oriented mindset. We know that Paul is thinking along these terms because in the very last sentence he intentionally juxtaposes this phrase by talking about "truth" and "the sight of God", which is an indirect metaphor for light (in the sense that light is necessary for sight). Light of course is associated with the quality of spirit, as is God. Thus Paul is technically telling the truth here since he's the only one teaching the true, "honest", spiritual/pneumatic message of Christianity. That being said, the primary purpose of this verse is to make an indirect tongue in cheek reference to psychic Christians, especially with the phrase "nor handling the word of God deceitfully" which is figuratively describing their tendency to interpret scripture literally instead of allegorically. The following verse confirms this is the correct interpretation:

2 Corinthians 4:3
But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost (apollumenois):

Note that "our gospel" refers to the special pneumatic gospel.
-This word "apollumenois" also appears in the previous verse I exegeted from 1 Corinthians:

1 Corinthians 1:18
For the preaching (logos) of the cross is to them that perish (apollumenois) foolishness...

In both verses the lost/perishing (apollumenois) is referring to those unable to understand the higher pneumatic gospel, that is, the psychic Christians.
-Note that for the above verses, when reading them conventionally you get the impression they're connected in some way, however each verse seems to be talking about different groups in completely different contexts (2 Corinthians 4:3 is talking about other Christians who misunderstand the gospel, while 1 Corinthians 1:18 is talking about pagans who think Christianity is foolish); it's only when understanding these verses esoterically that they both agree about the group being referred to as well as the context, thus validating the impression of them being connected.

Random observations

A correction of the three part schema
-With regards to the three part hylic, psychic and pneumatic schema, I originally implied they represented the openness of a person towards learning spiritual concepts. In light of thoroughly exegeting Colossians 2 and 1 Corinthians 2, I now think it's more accurate to say that the three part schema has less to do with a generic willingness or inclination to approach spiritual concepts but rather it's more about the manner (according to the platonic form/matter distinction) in which one approaches these concepts.

Hypothesis for correct way to exegete Paul's letters
-Currently I'm exegeting Paul's letters in a random fashion, just noting thematic and verbal connections throughout his letters and then digging in deeper when I find something. Obviously this approach works, but in theory I think the reader is intended to exegete Paul's letters in the exact order they're presented in the NT. Although I don't plan on doing this (I prefer my current approach), it's worth notating because it might be useful at some point. I suspect the canonical chronological order that Paul says things in may reveal subtle things about the cipher itself or the text which aren't apparent when you're just randomly jumping back and forth between books with no concern for chronology.

An interesting realization about gnostic Christianity
-The common understanding of gnostic Valentinian Christianity is that it's the result of people who imposed platonic philosophy onto pre-existing Christian religious traditions. What I've realized from all my research on this topic is that the more likely explanation is that the progenitor of their theology (Simon Magus/Paul) was platonic from the very beginning. I say this because the demiurge concept (originally taken from Plato's Timaeus) was a major part of gnostic Christian theology and is mentioned frequently throughout the esoteric exegeses compiled in The Gnostic Paul; which as I've demonstrated throughout this thread, appear to reveal legitimate hidden themes within Paul's canonical letters from the NT. If the information contained within The Gnostic Paul actually represents the teachings passed down from Simon Magus/Paul regarding his own letters then that means platonism was baked into the New Testament from the start. Therefore it would be more accurate to consider Paul's pneumatic teaching of Christianity as bona fide "Platonic Christianity" instead of merely seeing it as a counterfeit platonically influenced flavor of Christianity.

Clarification on the gnostic Sophia myth
-I felt like this was already strongly implied in the previous post but I wanted to reiterate that the gnostic Christians understood this myth as allegorical. I wanted to clarify this since many (vocal) online gnostics are interpreting this myth too literally. While on this topic, I want to add that I don't think it should be read in the same way we read "serious" religious texts like the bible, rather it should be read like Greek mythology (which makes sense since it borrows so many elements from it). I think this was basically the intent of Simon Magus who was trying to use the Helena/Sophia myth as an instructional story intended for internal circulation and not as an evangelical tract or "religious" treatise. This is an important distinction because I get the impression the original gnostics understood Christianity as a philosophy, not as a religion. It's not a coincidence the platonically influenced gnostic Christians were so "Sophia"-centric, which also happens to be the root word of philosophy. To these gnostics, "religion" was only for psychics that understood religious stories literally instead of allegorically.

While on the topic of apocrypha, I want to clarify that I don't think it's necessary to use the Nag Hammadi or other related texts to understand gnostic Christianity. I think these texts are occasionally useful to provide context (as I've used them many times in this thread) but I don't really use them outside of that. I have many good reasons why this is, but for now I'll just provisionally say that I think the canonical bible is already a complete system and has almost everything needed to understand either the psychic or pneumatic message of Christianity. There are of course some kinks I need to figure out (as noted in part 1/2 of this post regarding the limits of Paul's cipher), but eventually I'm hoping to demonstrate that pneumatic Christianity can be fully rationalized within the confines of the canon NT.

An expanded exegesis on 1 Corinthians 2:1-5
This passage was already exegeted in The Gnostic Paul (page 57), however my new exegesis is intended to provide additional clarity since I felt like parts of it were ambiguous. Here's a link to the passage so you can compare it while reading along: https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?s ... ersion=KJV

1 Corinthians 2:1
And I, brethren, when I came to you, came not with excellency (huperoche) of speech or of wisdom (sophia), declaring unto you the testimony of God.

Paul didn't come to teach his audience with the higher pneumatic logos of Sophia ("excellency of speech or of wisdom").
-The original Koine-Greek version uses the word "huperoche" for "excellency", which has a connotation of superiority/elevation that "excellency" doesn't adequately convey to modern English speakers.

1 Corinthians 2:2
For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified.

This verse implies Paul has multiple teachings and thus multiple audiences (hence "among you"), however he chose ("determined") only to teach: "Jesus Christ, and him crucified" (and not pneumatic logos of Sophia) amongst his current audience.

1 Corinthians 2:3
3 And I was with you in weakness, and in fear, and in much trembling.

Recall that psychic Christians are granted the "power" of God. The antithesis of "power" is "weakness", the implication being that psychic Christians need the "power" of God because they're weak. Therefore "weakness" here functions as a code word for psychic Christians. Paul here is pretending to be one of the psychic Christians by mimicking their "weak" emotional state.
-Notice how this verse subtly juxtaposes the impression of "lowness and weakness" with the sense of "highness and strength" implied in 1 Corinthians 2:1, as if to implicitly acknowledge the existence of two types of Christians.

1 Corinthians 2:4
And my speech (logos) and my preaching (kerygma) was not with enticing words of man's wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power:

The previous verse implied Paul came to a "weak" psychic audience teaching the lower psychic gospel (with "power"), while this verse implies a secret intention to find potential pneumatic students while preaching the lower psychic gospel (this logic isn't apparent by reading verse in isolation, but it becomes apparent when you read the rest of the passage).
-This verse seems to contradict the previous ones where Paul only claims to be teaching the lower psychic gospel and not the higher pneumatic one, however this is a matter of perspective:

1 Corinthians 2:1-6
And I, brethren, when I came to you, came not with excellency of speech or of wisdom, declaring unto you the testimony of God. 2 For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified. 3 And I was with you in weakness, and in fear, and in much trembling. 4 And my speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of man's wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power: 5 That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God. 6 Howbeit we speak wisdom among them that are perfect...

Notice how often and in what manner the words "you/your" are used, now consider the same for "my/we". Paul is contrasting their perspective as psychic Christians with his own perspective, first as an apparent psychic that's teaching ambiguous messages towards mixed psychic/pneumatic audiences ("my"), and secondly as someone belonging purely to the pneumatic class ("we"). Especially note how verse 4 ("preaching/power") impacts the reading of verse 5, which connects the idea of "your faith" with the "power of God" (thus referencing their current [psychic] level of faith that was attained through Paul's preaching), which confirms the previous impression from verse 3 that Paul was originally talking to a psychic audience.
-Recall that Paul must proceed with secrecy because his psychic audience wouldn't understand the overt pneumatic message:

1 Corinthians 1:17
For the logos of the cross (pneumatic message) is to them that perish (psychic Christians) foolishness

The "logos of Sophia" being mentioned in the previous chapter (1 Corinthians 1:16) and this one (1 Corinthians 2:1) allows the initiated reader to infer Paul's reason for teaching secretly, which helps contextualize the rest of the passage.
-To recap, Paul isn't explicitly teaching the higher pneumatic logos since he's masquerading as one of the psychic Christians, however his psychic preaching has hidden pneumatic undertones which some of his audience understand (although most do not). This can be see in the following verses:

1 Corinthians 2:5-6
That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God. (addressed towards psychic Christians, which are most of the audience) 6 Howbeit we speak wisdom among them that are perfect (addressed towards the few pneumatically inclined people): yet not the wisdom of this world, nor of the princes of this world, that come to nought:

In spite of Paul predominantly preaching the psychic gospel to this audience, his real intention is to share the pneumatic gospel with those who are capable of understanding it, which can be inferred by how he spends the rest of the chapter elaborating on the special qualities of his spiritual logos.
-Recall how "my preaching (power)" from verse 4 correlates with "your faith" in verse 5; likewise "my speech (spirit)" in verse 4 correlates with the wisdom that "we" speak (among the perfect) in verse 6. The implication is that only Paul's psychic teaching ("my preaching") is recognizable to the psychic audience and thus considered as "your faith", meanwhile Paul's subtler pneumatic teaching ("my speech") is imperceptible to them, thus it doesn't belong to them, instead belonging to "we", referring to the higher pneumatic Christians.

Paul's pastorals are 1 & 2 Timothy and Titus. On the surface they appear mundane but reveal a unique logic when juxtaposed against the Catholic epistles which are James, 1 & 2 Peter, 1, 2 & 3 John and Jude (to quickly clarify, Paul's pastorals represent the pneumatic Pauline faction while the Catholic epistles represent the psychic Petrine faction). Casual readers typically read both as being in agreement, being completely unaware they actually oppose each other. In that regards, I strongly believe it's only once you recognize this underlying schism that these letters really begin to speak to the reader. With that being said, I'll begin by analyzing Paul's pastorals:

Paul's pastoral letters
The pastorals reveal their general theme through frequently recurring words and phrases, so for this section I'll first provide a list of verses in chronological order (with relevant words bolded) and then at the bottom I'll discuss their mutual significance:

1 Timothy 1:3-7
3 As I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus, when I went into Macedonia, that thou mightest charge some that they teach no other doctrine, 4 Neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith: so do. 5 Now the end of the commandment is charity out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned: 6 From which some having swerved have turned aside unto vain jangling; 7 Desiring to be teachers of the law; understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm.

1 Timothy 4:7
7 But refuse profane and old wives' fables, and exercise thyself rather unto godliness.

1 Timothy 6:20-21
20 O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science (gnosis) falsely so called: 21 Which some professing have erred concerning the faith. Grace be with thee. Amen.

2 Timothy 2:16-18
16 But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness. 17 And their word will eat as doth a canker: of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus; 18 Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some.*

2 Timothy 3:2-9
2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, 3 Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, 4 Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; 5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away. 6 For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts, 7 Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth. 8 Now as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, so do these also resist the truth: men of corrupt minds, reprobate concerning the faith. 9 But they shall proceed no further: for their folly shall be manifest unto all men, as their's also was.

2 Timothy 4:3-4
3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; 4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.

Titus 1:9-16
9 Holding fast the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers. 10 For there are many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers, specially they of the circumcision: 11 Whose mouths must be stopped, who subvert whole houses, teaching things which they ought not, for filthy lucre's sake. 12 One of themselves, even a prophet of their own, said, the Cretians are alway liars, evil beasts, slow bellies. 13 This witness is true. Wherefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith; 14 Not giving heed to Jewish fables, and commandments of men, that turn from the truth. 15 Unto the pure all things are pure: but unto them that are defiled and unbelieving is nothing pure; but even their mind and conscience is defiled. 16 They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate.

Verse 11 appears to specifically correlates with 2 Timothy 3:6

Titus 3:9-11
9 But avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and vain. 10 A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject; 11 Knowing that he that is such is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned of himself.

Throughout 1 & 2 Timothy, Paul continually warns about false teachers but in relatively vague terms, frequently referring to "fables", "vain babblings", "genealogies" etc. It's only in Titus where Paul explicitly identifies these false teachers as belonging to a pro-law faction, which implicitly refers to Peter's group. The irony is that casual readers usually think Paul is condemning gnostics here but in reality it's just the opposite. Now having outlined the general theme of the pastorals there's a few interesting observations:

#1.Notice how hyperbolic some of Paul's criticisms sound. If it wasn't for Paul explicitly referencing Peter's faction through words like "law", "Jewish fables", "circumcision" etc then we would never suspect Paul was referring to psychic Christians. Having said that (regardless of how true Paul's criticisms actually are), I'm more interested in how these passages can help contextualize similar lists of moral condemnations that Paul occasionally issues in his letters. One such example occurs in Romans:

Romans 1:28-32
28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; 29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, 30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, 31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: 32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

According to the conventional exegesis of this passage Paul is referring to a group of Christians that have embraced homosexuality and become morally deficient, however according to the esoteric exegesis (The Gnostic Paul, pages 16-18), Paul is using homosexuality as a metaphor to describe how a group of primarily psychic ("female") Christians have fallen away from their pneumatic ("male") counterparts, with each "gender" instead desiring to consort with their own. Having established that, notice the large overlap of terms in this passage with terms appearing in 2 Timothy 3:2-9 and Titus 1:9-16 (passages related to psychic Christians), implying that this is likewise referring to psychic Christians, which if true, suggests the esoteric exegesis is authentic since it's the only one that specifically refers to psychic Christians. In this same manner, through familiarizing ourselves with other contexts where Paul uses similarly worded lists we can easily triangulate the true audience of a given passage.

Another example is in Galatians 5 where Paul starts the chapter with a subtle rebuke against the Petrine faction by criticizing the practice of circumcision (a code reference for flesh/carnality), but it's only around the second half of the chapter where Paul stops using the word circumcision and instead just uses the word flesh:

Galatians 5:16-21
16 This I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh. 17 For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would. 18 But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law. 19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, 20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, 21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.

I believe he does this on purpose to throw off psychic readers, so they think he's shifting from doctrinal issues to moral ones. You can see this in verses 16-17 where Paul talks about fulfilling the lust of the flesh, which to psychics implies indulgence in vice, while pneumatics (who know he's still talking in doctrinal terms) understand it as adopting a material/carnal outlook at the expense of a noetic one. Afterwards in verse 18 (with a wink and a nod to the pneumatics), Paul states that those led by the spirit are not under the law, which he then follows with a lengthy list of moral condemnations, referred to as "works of the flesh". At this point, the pneumatic reader (already familiar with similar lists) would understand verses 19-21 as being a jab at the psychic Petrine faction who are still under the law, thus still "fulfilling the lusts of the flesh". Note that this is also thematically consistent with the rest of the chapter, being that when read esoterically the entire chapter is a protracted polemic against Peter's faction; it's only when reading it conventionally that there's an abrupt segue to discussing morality/sin instead of doctrinal issues like in the first half of the chapter.

There's yet another layer of interpretation though, which isn't necessarily mutually exclusive with the prior one. Many of the things from the list can be understood literally as well as figuratively. Below are some examples of symbolic interpretations I've inferred so far:

Idolatry => to mistake material appearances for true noetic reality.

Drunkenness => to only be aware of the material realm, lacking "sobriety" with regards to the formal/spiritual realm.

Adultery => this is likely related to the "bride of Christ" metaphor outlined in Ephesians 5:25-33, where the church (an abstract reference to all Christians) is the bride and Christ is the groom, with their marriage symbolizing the divine syzygy (enlightenment). Thus if the divine marriage symbolizes enlightenment then adultery suggests lapsing into the illusion of materiality again.

Fornication => in antiquity fornication had connotations of prostitution. In the original Helena/Sophia myth, Helena got lost in the realm of matter and reincarnated for multiple lives until she was finally found as a prostitute in a brothel by Simon Magus. Therefore fornication means to embrace materiality at the expense of noetic perception.

Notice how these things appear as different actions when understood literally, but when understood figuratively they're describing the same concept, which is the failure to correctly "perceive".

#2.It's possible these lists of hyperbolic condemnations are intended to evoke (within the initiated reader) echoes of the bloody conflict between Cain and Abel. This story is significant because it's a prototype for the story of Ishmael and Isaac, which Paul interprets allegorically and uses as the foundation for his theology (Galatians 4:22-31). The general idea is that Cain/Ishmael represents the psychics while Abel/Isaac represents the pneumatics (with Peter and Paul respectively representing the current iterations of this logic). These all follow the underlying logic that the first born is considered inferior to the second born, therefore the first is actually last (and the last is actually first). This is probably the same logic from the parable of the laborers in the vineyard:

Matthew 20:16
16 So the last shall be first, and the first last: for many be called, but few chosen.

Philosophically speaking, this dichotomy implies that what appears to be "first" (easily detectable material realities) is actually "last", and what appears to be "last" (harder to detect spiritual/formal realities) is actually "first" (in terms of metaphysical truth).

Having shared those observations, I'm going to proceed with the Catholic epistles, but first I will exegete a passage from Galatians that will help contextualize them better:

Galatians 2:6-10
6 But of these who seemed to be somewhat, (whatsoever they were, it maketh no matter to me: God accepteth no man's person:) for they who seemed to be somewhat in conference added nothing to me: 7 But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter; 8 (For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles:) 9 And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen ("gentiles"), and they unto the circumcision. 10 Only they would that we should remember the poor; the same which I also was forward to do.

In this passage Paul has gone to Jerusalem to visit the pillars of the church, who are James, Cephas/Peter and John. Paul remarks they only "seemed" to be important, implying they're not the real pillars of the church, rather Paul is (who alone experienced the pneumatic Christ). Likewise, they understood that Paul was entrusted with the pneumatic gospel and they with the psychic one. Having perceived the grace that was given to Paul, they gave him and Barnabas the "right" hands of fellowship, symbolically representing "those on the right", that is, the pneumatics who possess higher knowledge and authority, while "those on the left" are the psychics, possessing lower knowledge and authority. In closing, they ask Paul to remember the "poor", which is referring to the psychics amongst Paul's congregations (foreshadowed by the presence of Barnabas with Paul, who's implied to be psychic later in verse 13). Having said that, by understanding the mutually accepted hierarchy between pneumatic Paul and the psychic pillars (Peter's faction) we can better contextualize the Catholic epistles in relation to Paul's pastorals.
-Ironically the Catholic epistles (with the exception of Jude) appear in the same order the pillars are mentioned in Galatians 2:9 (James, 1&2 Peter, 1,2&3 John). This could be symbolically important, maybe suggesting that out of the pillars, James understands best, followed by Peter and then by John. If so, it's possible their letters might reflect this as well. Also note that Paul's acquaintance Titus accompanied them to Jerusalem too (Galatians 2:1), this same Titus being the recipient of Paul's pastoral "Titus".

*2 Timothy 2:18 appears to superficially contradict the theology of the Valentinians who taught "realized eschatology" (in the sense that spiritual resurrection happens in the present moment, as in "enlightenment"), however it needs to be understood within the broader context of Paul's opposition to Peter's psychic faction. I don't fully understand the context of that verse but this link explains what it's talking about:

The Hymenaeus and Philetus heresy postulated the establishment of the New Covenant while the earthly temple in Jerusalem ‘was yet standing’. Their ulterior motive was to justify the inclusion of the Law of Moses into Christianity, resulting in a mixture of Law and Grace.

https://discover.hubpages.com/religion- ... etusHeresy

Note that this is only a historical explanation, which may be completely accurate, however my current hypothesis is that the entire bible is allegorical fiction that's only loosely based on historical events, so in the interests of verifying that hypothesis I generally prefer symbolic explanations of texts.

Catholic epistles
As previously stated these epistles thematically oppose the pastorals, but in accordance with my exegesis of Galatians 2:6-9 they should also be understood as less authoritative than Paul's letters. Equally important is that Galatians 2:9 describes a formal agreement between Paul and the pillars to teach different audiences, therefore the schism evident in these letters could be orchestrated and only meant to hem in the flock (Peter's faction is only responsible for maintaining the faith of the psychics, it's not their job to make them pneumatics). Additionally, if the NT is actually a work of harmonized allegorical fiction then we could just interpret the mutual acrimony between both factions as playful intratextual riposte. Having said that, for these epistles I'll be discussing individual passages since the textual nuances are more subtle and require greater elaboration. As with before, all passages occur in chronological order.

James
James is more subtle in his criticism of the pneumatics than the others. I initially believed he wasn't addressing them at all until I read the text closer. I'll still need to reread his epistle later to confirm my findings so for now consider these exegeses as more provisional than the rest.

James 1:5-8
5 If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him. 6 But let him ask in faith, nothing wavering. For he that wavereth is like a wave of the sea driven with the wind and tossed. 7 For let not that man think that he shall receive any thing of the Lord. 8 A double minded man is unstable in all his ways.

This passage feels like a playful jab at Paul. The mention of "wisdom" appears to be a reference to Sophia (who Paul teaches about), while verse 8 reinforces this impression by mentioning a "double minded man" which brings to mind Paul, who teaches in two ways. The overall nuance being that Paul is delusional (from James' perspective) and only thinks he has esoteric wisdom when really he doesn't.
-The word "unstable" being used with "double minded man" is what initially tipped me off to this passage. This is because "unstable" only occurs three times in the Catholic epistles and two of those are when Peter is referring to gnostics.

James 1:9-11
Let the brother of low degree rejoice in that he is exalted: 10 But the rich, in that he is made low: because as the flower of the grass he shall pass away. 11 For the sun is no sooner risen with a burning heat, but it withereth the grass, and the flower thereof falleth, and the grace of the fashion of it perisheth: so also shall the rich man fade away in his ways.

This passage is nominally talking about the poor and rich but they seem like coded references to psychics and pneumatics (recall how "poor" was used by James and the pillars to refer to psychics in Galatians 2:10). Note that since this is written from James's perspective it naturally extols the "low" (psychics) and criticizes the "rich" (pneumatics), who are specifically associated with "grace", which was used in reference to Paul (Galatians 2:9).

James 2:14
What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him?

James places a heavy emphasis on works (especially in this chapter), works being associated with psychics, whereas the pneumatics believe they're justified through grace. Also I didn't mention this previously when discussing the pastorals, but they mention works very infrequently compared to the Catholic epistles and only in very careful terms.

James 3:13-14
13 Who is a wise man and endued with knowledge among you? let him shew out of a good conversation his works with meekness of wisdom. 14 But if ye have bitter envying and strife in your hearts, glory not, and lie not against the truth.

Verse 13 is criticizing the "wise" pneumatics, implying they're arrogant (from the psychic's perspective) and insinuating they should be more humble. The following verse reinforces this notion that it's a polemic directed towards pneumatics with the usage of words like "envying" and "strife", which are the same words Paul uses when criticizing the opposing psychic faction. Casual readers underestimate the schism between Peter and Paul's factions so they don't realize what words like "strife" truly imply in this passage.
-For brevity's sake I left out the surrounding verses, but if you carefully read this entire chapter then you get the impression it's a cautionary warning about the (few) pneumatics and their capacity for leading the (many) psychics who constitute the main body of the church (I'm referring to the horse and ship metaphor in James 3:3-4). Ostensibly he's talking about the tongue and being cautious in what you say, but a lot of what he's saying can also be figuratively applied to the pneumatic/psychic dichotomy, with his general stance being that pneumatics are too proud and condescending to psychics. Granted, I might be eisegeting the text, however this interpretation is completely consistent within the broader context of the oppositional relationship between Paul's pastorals and the Catholic epistles.

Peter

1 Peter 1:14
14 As obedient children, not fashioning yourselves according to the former lusts in your ignorance:

Peter refers to his audience as "children", the term children sometimes referring to psychic Christians. Below is an example of Paul using it in this way:

Galatians 4:1-5
Now I say, That the heir, as long as he is a child, differeth nothing from a servant, though he be lord of all; 2 But is under tutors and governors until the time appointed of the father. 3 Even so we, when we were children, were in bondage under the elements of the world: 4 But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, 5 To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons.

This passage implies that the psychics who are still under the law are considered "children".

1 Peter 2:2
As newborn babes, desire the sincere milk of the word, that ye may grow thereby:

Peter once again uses similar terminology to refer to his audience, this time using "babes" in connection with "milk". For additional context, there's a few occasions where Paul uses these words to refer to psychics:

1 Corinthians 3:1-2
1 And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ. 2 I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able.

Romans 2:20
An instructor of the foolish, a teacher of babes, which hast the form of knowledge and of the truth in the law.

Hebrews 5:12-13
12 For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat. 13 For every one that useth milk is unskilful in the word of righteousness: for he is a babe

According to the meanings that Paul established for these words, Peter is teaching psychics.* The fact that Peter is using Paul's secret code words can be explained by conceiving the NT as internally consistent allegory designed to complement and promote a particular narrative, or if we assume the NT is historical then it can be explained by the fact that Paul previously came to an agreement with the pillars, so they already understand what he's teaching and they're adopting complementary language that's appropriate to their roles.

1 Peter 3:6
Even as Sara obeyed Abraham, calling him lord: whose daughters ye are, as long as ye do well, and are not afraid with any amazement.

This is a strange verse since Sara and Abraham never had any daughters, only a son, Isaac. The underlying implication is that "daughters" suggests the psychic disposition which is metaphorically female. Therefore this verse also implies that Peter's audience are psychics.

1 Peter 4:3-4 (NIV, for clarity)
3 For you have spent enough time in the past doing what pagans (gentiles/pneumatics) choose to do—living in debauchery, lust, drunkenness, orgies, carousing and detestable idolatry. 4 They are surprised that you do not join them in their reckless, wild living, and they heap abuse on you.

This is addressing Paul's anti-law stance which he advocates for pneumatics. From the psychic perspective, pneumatics are reckless libertines since they don't live piously like the psychics do. Note that once you realize the Catholic epistles are thematically opposed to Paul's pastorals then you can infer numerous things about the pneumatics that aren't otherwise stated elsewhere, although you do have to adjust for possible exaggeration.

2 Peter 1:16
For we have not followed cunningly (sophizo) devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty.

This verse subtly references the gnostic Sophia myth, the word "sophizo" being etymologically related to "sophia". Note that "eyewitnesses" refers to Peter and the other apostles who were instructed by the fleshly Christ (who can be seen) which tacitly implies the Sophia myth is connected with Paul (who only met the spiritual Christ). Therefore this verse indirectly confirms that the gnostics were the legitimate heirs of Paul's teachings and weren't just latecomers that appropriated Christian writings as commonly believed. Also note that casual readers typically assume Peter and Paul are referring to the same fables throughout these letters when actually they're talking about different ones.

2 Peter 2:1
But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.

This verse suggests there's pneumatics infiltrating the psychic's ranks and introducing higher teachings. This is congruent with what Paul himself taught in 1 Corinthians 2:1-7, where he describes embedding himself in psychic congregations and pretending to be a fellow psychic while gradually imparting small amounts of pneumatic teachings and seeking potential pneumatic initiates.
-Recall that "Lord" is a codeword for the psychic Christ, therefore the clause "even denying the Lord that brought them" describes how pneumatics teach the spiritual Christ while deemphasizing the fleshly Christ, which seems like blasphemy to psychics who are unable to understand higher truths.

2 Peter 2:14
Having eyes full of adultery, and that cannot cease from sin; beguiling unstable souls: an heart they have exercised with covetous practices; cursed children:

Peter claims that pneumatics are beguiling "unstable" souls. Recall how unstable was used in James 1:8 to refer to Paul (who teaches in two ways), hence he's "unstable". Therefore unstable souls are those who question the psychic gospel and are receptive to learning its deeper meaning.

2 Peter 3:15-16
15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; 16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

This verse is specifically referring to the practice of esoterically exegeting Paul's letters. Casual readers would assume this is an official scripturally based sanction against reading Paul's letters in an esoteric manner, but if this verse is understood against the broader context then its authority becomes more conditional. Peter was commissioned to the psychics (Galatians 2:9), it's not his responsibility to impart pneumatic truth to his audience, he's only responsible for maintaining his (psychic) flock. As you've seen in the previous verses, it's clear that Peter understands who his audience is and the teaching they're supposed to receive. Since Peter is teaching "children", they're not supposed to know about Paul's higher teachings.
-Note that this passage portrays Paul as innocent, suggesting it's only "unlearned and unstable" people who are culpable for esoterically interpreting his letters, however this portrayal of Paul and the misdirection of his secret pneumatic activities is fully congruent with Paul's agreement with the pillars, although the specific reasoning is mentioned earlier in the chapter:

Galatians 2:2
2 And I went up by revelation, and communicated unto them that gospel which I preach among the Gentiles, but privately to them which were of reputation (Peter and the pillars), lest by any means I should run, or had run, in vain.

Paul went to Jerusalem and privately explained his pneumatic gospel to the pillars there. The implication being that Paul doesn't publically identify as a pneumatic, rather he presents himself as a psychic (as described in 1 Corinthians 2:1-7), and if he were to compromise his secret identity as a pneumatic teacher then it would negatively impact the evangelical activities he had been doing and continues to do involving psychic congregations ("lest by any means I should run, or had run, in vain"). So with that being said, 2 Peter 3:15-16 is "officially" correct, as far as psychic audiences are concerned.

John

1 John 1:1
1 That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life;

John uses very carnal language here, invoking the senses of hearing, seeing and touch; implying he primarily relates to the psychic Christ (according to the flesh).

1 John 2:1
My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate (paraclete) with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:

John also refers to his audience as "children", implying they're psychic. Note that the Catholic epistles use "children" seventeen times in the context of addressing audiences while Paul's pastoral letters only use it seven times and in a family context: https://www.biblegateway.com/quicksearc ... =47&end=73
-This verse also mentions the paraclete (first mentioned in John 16:7-16). From reading through John's epistles I get the impression he envisions a paraclete theologically related to the psychic Christ, as opposed to the pneumatics who believed Paul himself was the paraclete (carrying it's own unique theological implications). My own (provisional) understanding is that John predicted the coming of the paraclete but due to his inferior psychic understanding he didn't realize that Paul was the promised paraclete.

1 John 2:18-19
18 Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time. 19 They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.

From the psychic ("children") perspective, pneumatics appear to be fellow psychics but actually aren't (like Paul), hence "they went out from us, but they were not of us". Note that psychics only recognize the fleshly Christ, the spiritual Christ is the opposite of everything they know, hence they perceive it as the antichrist. You can see this same phenomena in the gospels:

Matthew 12:22-24
22 Then one possessed with a demon was brought to Him, blind and mute, and He healed him, so that the blind and mute man both spoke and saw. 23 All the people were amazed and said, “Is He not the Son of David?” 24 But when the Pharisees heard it, they said, “This Man does not cast out demons, except by Beelzebub the ruler of the demons.”

The Pharisees (considered as "hylics", therefore having lower understanding relative to psychics) think the psychic Christ is healing through the power of demons, likewise the psychics (having lower understanding relative to pneumatics) perceive the higher pneumatic gospel as being of the antichrist. The common theme is that those below can't understand what's above them, but those above can understand everything below (Paul talks about this in 1 Corinthians 2:14-15).

1 John 2:22
Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.

The psychics consider the pneumatics antichrist because they "deny" the (demiurgic) Father and the (fleshly) Son.

1 John 4:1-3
1 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world. 2 Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: 3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.

2 John 1:7
For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.

Since John is psychic he only recognizes the fleshly Christ and considers the pneumatics (who recognize the spiritual Christ) as being false prophets that deny Christ when really they're only rejecting a fleshly understanding of Christ.

Jude

Jude 1:4
For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.

Jude (belonging to Peter's faction) is implicitly referring to the fleshly Christ, but also in this verse he uses the word "Lord" twice, the first time referring to the demiurge and the second time referring to the psychic Christ. Thus Jude, like John, is also talking about pneumatics who are "denying" the fleshly Christ.

Jude 1:8-11
8 Likewise also these filthy dreamers defile the flesh, despise dominion, and speak evil of dignities (the demiurge). 9 Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee. 10 But these speak evil of those things which they know not: but what they know naturally, as brute beasts, in those things they corrupt themselves. 11 Woe unto them! for they have gone in the way of Cain, and ran greedily after the error of Balaam for reward, and perished in the gainsaying of Core.

Jude remarks in verse 8 how the pneumatics (who aren't under the law) live freely and teach about the demiurge. Afterwards he brings up a story involving Moses (whom pneumatics symbolically associate with the demiurge), using it to defend the "demiurge" by quoting the interaction between Michael and the devil, implicitly framing the pneumatics as the devil and himself as Michael.
-In verses 10-11 he calls the pneumatics brute beasts and implies that psychics are Abel, while pneumatics are the fallen Cain, implying he considers himself and the psychics as truly wise. This is a good example of the outlook Paul was describing in 1 Corinthians:

1 Corinthians 1:26-27
26 For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called: 27 But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;

According to this passage, the truly wise are the few chosen (pneumatics), who only appear foolish to the many called (psychics) that think of themselves as wise but actually aren't. On a related note, "Paul" is a Latin name that means "small" or "humble", which reflects the NT narrative where Paul was the very last apostle:

1 Corinthians 15:8-9
And last of all He was seen by me also, as by one born out of due time. 9 For I am the least of the apostles, not meet to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God.

Although Paul was the last/least apostle, he was the only one to receive perfect gnosis from the pneumatic Christ, therefore Paul's story arc symbolizes concepts like "the few and the many" and "the last is first".

*Regarding the milk/meat dichotomy, Paul refers to meat exactly once in the pastorals, in 1 Timothy:

1 Timothy 4:3
3 Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.

The traditional exegesis of this verse is that Paul is referring to an unnamed heretical group, however I suspect it's meant to be read figuratively. I think "forbidding to marry" is referring to how psychic Christians reject "meat" (higher gnosis) which prevents them from attaining the pneumatic marriage, that is, the divine syzygy (enlightenment), this is why "forbidding to marry" and "abstaining from meats" are mentioned together. Also note where it says meats are to be received with thanksgiving by those who "know the truth", perhaps referring to those people who are pneumatically inclined.

Conclusion
As you can see, there's clear thematic differences between Paul's pastoral letters and the Catholic epistles which faithfully reflect the theological divide between Paul and Peter's faction. Prior to becoming familiarized with them I mistakenly assumed they were only dull doctrinal treatises, but now I realize they're quite revealing. I think the most interesting thing when reading them against each other is how each set implicitly confirms the position of the opposing set. Therefore Paul's pastorals with their consistent anti-law stance confirm that Peter's faction is extremely pro-law (which is no surprise), however the Catholic epistles with their intense focus on "false prophets" unexpectedly imply Paul was involved with the gnostics. So ironically we get the most evidence for Paul being gnostic from the place you would least expect it. On a broader level, the entire NT itself revolves around this theological conflict which finds its ultimate expression within Peter and Paul and subsequently, the NT reads much more coherently when read as a narrative about two opposing factions of Christians instead of being about a single united religion. It's no coincidence that Paul wrote half the books in the NT and Peter's faction wrote the other half. Likewise, it's because of this mutually defining dualistic character that I exclusively use the NT (as opposed to apocrypha) for researching gnostic Christianity. After all, it's impossible to understand what "pneumatic" entails without first knowing what "psychic" is, and both are adequately represented within the NT. On a closing note, I want to acknowledge this post was only a general overview of these letters, it's by no means comprehensive. There's still many things I didn't examine more deeply, however I made sure to cover the most important points.

Additional observations
I have a few observations tangentially related to this post:

The ethics of pneumatic Christians
According to Paul, pneumatic Christians are no longer under the law:

Galatians 5:18
But if ye be led of the Spirit (pneumati), ye are not under the law.

The pneumatics are no longer under the law because they understand the true spirit of the law and aren't constrained by the letter of the law. According to Paul the spirit of the law is:

Galatians 5:14
For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

Therefore the pneumatics who have true gnosis realize the only thing that matters is love, everything else is simply a means to an end. I've provided an excerpt from Irenaeus's book "Against Heresies" which describes (albeit antagonistically) what their "law-free" lifestyle looked like:

Chapter VI, section 3:
Wherefore also it comes to pass, that the "most perfect" among them addict themselves without fear to all those kinds of forbidden deeds of which the Scriptures assure us that "they who do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God." For instance, they make no scruple about eating meats offered in sacrifice to idols, imagining that they can in this way contract no defilement. Then, again, at every heathen festival celebrated in honour of the idols, these men are the first to assemble; and to such a pitch do they go, that some of them do not even keep away from that bloody spectacle hateful both to God and men, in which gladiators either fight with wild beasts, or singly encounter one another. Others of them yield themselves up to the lusts of the flesh with the utmost greediness, maintaining that carnal things should be allowed to the carnal nature, while spiritual things are provided for the spiritual.*

http://www.gnosis.org/library/advh1.htm

The pneumatics aren't bound to conventional (psychic) Christian morality and are free to live as they want, however Paul acknowledges that moderation is useful too:

1 Corinthians 10:23
All things are lawful for me (Paul speaking as a pneumatic), but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but all things edify not.

I don't want to give the impression the pneumatics were all libertines, obviously they weren't, but rather they were simply entitled to live how they desired without any religious restrictions. Having said that, a major part of Paul's pneumatic teaching entails showing compassion towards lower psychic Christians and trying to meet them at their own level, with the general idea being that psychics make up for in piety what they lack in gnosis. For this reason, Paul urges voluntary restraint around psychics so as to not damage their faith:

1 Corinthians 8:7-9 (NIV, for clarity)
7 But not everyone possesses this knowledge (gnosis). Some people are still so accustomed to idols that when they eat sacrificial food they think of it as having been sacrificed to a god, and since their conscience is weak, it is defiled. 8 But food does not bring us near to God; we are no worse if we do not eat, and no better if we do. 9 Be careful, however, that the exercise of your rights does not become a stumbling block to the weak..

Therefore pneumatic morality entails freedom but also with responsibility towards lower believers.

Eternal judgment and the afterlife
Regarding this topic, we already know that if "Paul" was actually Simon Magus then he was teaching reincarnation since that concept is implicit within the Sophia/Helena myth, however I want to specifically address what Paul says regarding eternal judgment within the NT itself. For this I'll be going over some passages from Hebrews:

Hebrews 5:11-14
11 Of whom we have many things to say, and hard to be uttered, seeing ye are dull of hearing. 12 For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat. 13 For every one that useth milk is unskilful in the word of righteousness: for he is a babe. 14 But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.

Paul criticizes his psychic audience, lamenting they're slow learners while using frequent milk/meat analogies. He continues addressing this audience in the following chapter:

Hebrews 6:1-2
6 Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God, 2 Of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment

In this passage Paul is talking about various things implied to be beginner concepts ("milk"), however it's written in such a manner that psychics (who are unaware of a higher pneumatic teaching) will interpret these things as foundational concepts that are always true while pneumatic will interpret them as temporary teachings that provide a matrix upon which true knowledge can be added later on. Having said that, the pneumatic interpretation is implied to be correct by the previous verse (Hebrews 5:14) which suggests that "full age" (maturity) is associated with "those who can discern both good and evil", specifically implying the "milk" teaching of eternal judgment (judgment being the act of rewarding or punishing actions) is intended to help develop that faculty. Notice that none of the other things listed in Hebrews 6:1-2 are relevant for building up that ability, only eternal judgment; which is why I think it was listed last. There's another verse in Hebrews related to this as well:

Hebrews 9:27-28
27 And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment: 28 So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.

To paraphrase verse 27, saying "man will die once and then judgment" has the same functional meaning as eternal judgment, that is, to only die once implies that judgment is permanent. The fact that Paul is playing around with words instead of simply using "eternal judgment" again suggests he's conveying a hidden meaning here. Notice how verse 27 and 28 both employ the motif of dying once, which implies that verse 27 is being used to set up the logic of the first clause of verse 28, which states "So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many". Recall that "many" is a code word for psychics, thus this clause is addressed to them, which implies that the previous verse 27 is addressed towards psychics as well. Likewise, if you already suspected that eternal judgment is a psychic teaching (Hebrews 6:1-2) then this passage appears to be intended to confirm that impression. As for the second clause of verse 28, it's addressed to pneumatics ("unto them that look for him"), where he will appear "the second time", which I interpret as a reference to Paul who only met the second pneumatic Christ (and not the first psychic Christ, who "was once offered to bear the sins of many"), and finally the phrase "without sin unto salvation" ("sin", as in "hamartia", indicating imperfect understanding) suggests true salvation, which is receiving the perfect pneumatic gnosis. On a closing note I want to point out that the Valentinians believed in universal salvation:

The Valentinians (A.D. 130) taught that all souls will be finally admitted to the realms of bliss. They denied the resurrection of the body. Their doctrines were widely disseminated in Asia, Africa and Europe, after the death of their Egyptian founder, Valentine. They resembled the teachings of Basilides in efforts to solve the problem of human destiny philosophically. Valentine flourished, in Rome from A.D. 129 to 132. A devout Christian, and a man of the highest genius, he was never accused of anything worse than heresy. He was "a pioneer in Christian theology." His was an attempt to show, in dramatic form, how "the work of universal redemption is going on to the ever-increasing glory of the ineffable and unfathomable Father, and the ever-increasing blessedness of souls." There was a germ of truth in the hybrid Christian theogony and Hellenic philosophizing that made up Valentinianism. It was a struggle after the only view of human destiny that can satisfy the human heart.

https://www.tentmaker.org/books/Prevailing.html#90

While on the topic of Hebrews, I would like to mention that I suspect it's the pneumatic equivalent of Revelation, not in the sense that it's eschatological but rather in that it functions as a denouement for Paul's canon within the NT by virtue of being the very last book in it. As you've seen throughout this thread, the ordering of books in the NT appears to have great symbolic importance.

*In order to keep things concise I only posted part of the excerpt from Irenaeus, here's the second part of the passage which requires special explanation:

Some of them, moreover, are in the habit of defiling those women to whom they have taught the above doctrine, as has frequently been confessed by those women who have been led astray by certain of them, on their returning to the Church of God, and acknowledging this along with the rest of their errors. Others of them, too, openly and without a blush, having become passionately attached to certain women, seduce them away from their husbands, and contract marriages of their own with them. Others of them, again, who pretend at first. to live in all modesty with them as with sisters, have in course of time been revealed in their true colours, when the sister has been found with child by her [pretended] brother.

The remarks about leading women astray/seducing them are likely a euphemism referring to Valentinian practices of secretly recruiting potential pneumatics from psychic congregations (this is a similar process described in the esoteric exegesis of 1 Corinthians 2:1-6). In this metaphor, "women" refers to psychic Christians and their "husband" is the Catholic church. I know this because a similar metaphor was used to describe the quasi-gnostic Marcion's activities:

In 394, Epiphanius claimed that after beginnings as an ascetic, Marcion seduced a virgin and was accordingly excommunicated by his father, prompting him to leave his home town.[18] Some scholars have taken this "seduction of a virgin" as a metaphor for Marcion's corruption of the Christian Church, with the Church portrayed as the undefiled virgin,[19] and that Marcion apparently has become "the victim of the historicisation of such a metaphor, even though it contradicts the otherwise firm tradition of his strict sexual probity".[20]: 102  Doubtful is Tertullian's claim in The Prescription Against Heretics (written c. 200) that Marcion professed repentance, and agreed to the conditions granted to him — that he should receive reconciliation if he restored to the Church those whom he had led astray — but that he was prevented from doing so by his death.[21]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcion_of_Sinope

It's still possible Irenaeus could be speaking literally about seducing married women but I doubt it would represent typical pneumatic morality. As followers of Paul, the pneumatics had laid-back lifestyles (particularly relative to psychics) because the only law they were expected to follow was the law of love, which naturally precludes behavior that harms others.