But if you look at the immediate context of these 'spirit' statements in the Pauline writings it is plain (to me at least) that they have been 'contextually altered.' Let's start with Romans 12:13. As it stands the statement which the Martyrdom of Pionius treats in a 'spiritual manner' (i.e. to serve the dead by acting as a spokesman for them) is transformed into a general command to serve the living. One of the standard English translations:
Be devoted to one another in love. Honor one another above yourselves. 11 Never be lacking in zeal, but keep your spiritual fervor, serving the Lord. 12 Be joyful in hope, patient in affliction, faithful in prayer. 13 Share with the Lord’s people who are in need. Practice hospitality.
This is why I think the reference to Marcion are so important. In a Trump-like manner we hear from the Church Fathers that Marcion 'cut' the scriptures because of some base motive (= 'hatread' of the Jewish religion). But when you actually look at the scriptures and their interpretation in the earliest sources there are inevitably these 'maxims' (like the one we are dealing with) buried within a section that transforms the surprising into the mundane. In this case being a spokesman for Christ via the Holy Spirit into 'helping the poor' the needy (physically) etc.
To the same effect, we should see that 'memoirs' - although normally taken to mean 'things that I remember (from my own physical existence/life' - have a potentially different meaning in early Christianity. We normally take it to be self-evident that for instance Simon 'Peter' in some sense 'remembered' what happened in 30 CE and passed that information along to Mark in Rome c. 60 CE. This is how the gospel is a 'memorial' i.e. a historical event that is 'remembered' in writing through dictation to a secretary by one who actually lived through certain events. But I wonder now whether - and this is a tentative suggestion - whether 'memory' had some flexibility to include events which took place 'in the spirit.' In the contemporary 'druggie' sense I ask, could Simon have 'gotten high' with a bunch of his companions and then flew out of his body back through time and space to life before the destruction of the Jewish religion and later 'remembered' the events of his out of body experience as some sort of dictated written 'memorial'?
What I think was the game changer for me was looking at Clement's description (Strom 2.118 and 3.25) of Nicolaus's 'memorial' of the post-resurrection apostolic assembly. This is described as Nicolaus's 'memorial' of a certain event i.e. his having a wife (named) Horea a name that has been demonstrated by my good friend Birger Pearson as a Jewish demon/female hypostasis (the equivalent of 'Lilith'). This 'wife' is offered by Nicolaus to his apostolic companions and those followers (assuming that some of the companions later established disciples who became 'Nicolaitians') allegedly interpreted that 'giving' in a gross sexual manner.
The fact that Clement of Alexandria can stand at the gateway to a written 'memorial' that was interpreted in a mythical allegorical manner (i.e. all the sects that embraced Horea/Norea and gnostic understandings about a universe established through a disobedient sexually 'ripe' female hypostasis) and say the 'memorial' is acceptable it's just the followers of Nicolaus who misinterpreted it is astounding. I can't twist and turn the reference to a redeemed 'Lilith' as a historical reference in any way. At best we might imagine that Mary Magdalene is somehow at the root of this reference and the well known gnostic trope that Jesus's beloved disciple was Mary and his mission was rooted in an early (perhaps the earliest) application of the Song of Solomon (as we see in the Edessa).
Be that as it may, Jesus's relationship with Mary cannot be seen as historical (despite what Karen King and the forger of the Gospel of Jesus's Wife want us to believe). Mary Magdalene the historical person is a later offshoot of the myth of Horea/Norea not the other way around. The difficulty is that Nicolaus then isn't 'remembering' a historical event that he witnessed or participated in and then turned it around and made it 'a myth.' Instead the myth of Horea/Norea via the figure of Mary was 'demythicized' into a historical 'memorial' (i.e. that the gospel was a testament to something that actually happened in physical space and time) by second century writers who - for whatever reason - wanted the world to take the story of Jesus in a different manner than previous generations applied the story.
This is what I think is so astounding when you actually look at the manner in which individual 'maxims' have been reshaped in the context of a written 'narrative' gospel and a written 'collection of letters' attributed to a 'Paul.' For instance τὰ στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου in Galatians 4 are taken by the Marcionites (via Tertullian Adv Marc Book 4) to mean 'powers of the universe' or perhaps even in a Marcosian manner. In their present context in the long letter of Galatians it is unclear what Paul means. A standard translation reads:
Now I say, That the heir, as long as he is a child, differeth nothing from a servant, though he be lord of all; But is under tutors and governors until the time appointed of the father. Even so we, when we were children, were in bondage under the elements of the world: But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons.
We all agree I think that Paul is speaking about 'spiritual' realities, the narrative built around the maxims effectively acts as a watering down of the 'spiritual realities.' I wonder if this is intentional. The standard way of looking at the situation is that the heresies 'exaggerated' the level to which the early Church was rooted in myth. I wonder whether the added material (cf. the discussions of Marcion) reframed the maxims so they seemed to be rooted in normal 'everyday' concerns i.e. 'taking care of the sick' the ecclesiastical order of the Church, doctrine etc.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote