Many scholars, since
Ferdinand Christian Baur in the 19th century, have concluded that the attacks on "Simon Magus" in the 4th century
Pseudo-Clementines may be attacks on Paul. Detering takes the attacks of the Pseudo-Clementines as literal and historical, and suggests that the attacks of the Pseudo-Clementines are correct in identifying "Simon Magus" as a
proxy for
Paul of Tarsus, with Simon-Paul originally having been detested by the church, and the name changed to Paul when he was rehabilitated by virtue of
forged Epistles correcting the genuine ones. Detering's argument expands beyond the Pseudo-Clementines to include other apocrypha, arguing that Simon Magus is sometimes described in apocryphal legends in terms that would fit Paul, though most significantly in the
Clementine Recognitions and Homilies. Detering contends that the common source of these documents may be as early as the 1st century in a polemic against Paul, emanating from the Jewish side of Christianity. Having thus identified Paul with Simon, Detering argues that Simon's visit to Rome (in the Pseudo-Clementines) had no other basis than being an account of Paul's presence there, and, further, that the tradition of Peter's residence in Rome rests on the assumed necessity of his resisting the arch-enemy of Judaism there as elsewhere. Thus, according to Detering, the idea of Peter at Rome originated with the
Ebionites, but it was afterwards taken up by the Catholic Church, and then Paul was associated with Peter in opposition to Simon, who had originally been himself. ==Comments on Islam==