“While Simon Magus argues in the Homilies from the standpoint of every Gnostic, (Nazarenes and Ebionites included), Peter, as a true apostle of circumcision, holds to the old Law, and as a matter of course, seeks to blend his belief in the divinity of Christ with his old Faith in the “Lord God” and ex-protector of the “chosen people”. As the author of Supernatural Religion shows, the Epitome, “a blending of the other two, probably intended to purge them from heretical doctrine”, and together with a great majority of critics, assigns to the Homilies, a date not earlier than the end of the third century, we may well infer that they must differ widely with their original, if there ever was one.
Simon the Magician proves throughout the whole work that the Demiurgus, the Architect of the World, is not the highest Deity; and he bases his assertions upon the words of Jesus himself, who states repeatedly that “no man knew the Father.” Peter is made in the Homilies to repudiate, with a great show of indignation, the assertion that the Patriarchs were not deemed worthy to know the Father; to which Simon objects again by quoting the words of Jesus, who thanks the “Lord of Heaven and earth that what was concealed from the wise” he has “revealed to babes”, proving very logically that according to these very words the Patriarchs could not have known the “Father”.
Then Peter argues, in his turn, that the expression, “what is concealed from the wise”, etc., referred to the concealed mysteries of the creation. This argumentation of Peter, therefore, had it even emanated from the apostle himself, instead of being a “religious romance”, as the author of Supernatural Religion calls it, would prove nothing whatever in favor of the identity of the God of the Jews, with the “Father” of Jesus. At best it would only demonstrate that Peter had remained from first to last “an apostle of circumcision”, a Jew faithful to his old law, and a defender of the Old Testament.
This conversation proves, moreover, the weakness of the cause he defends, for we see in the apostle a man who, although in most intimate relations with Jesus, can furnish us nothing in the way of direct proof that he ever thought of teaching that the all-wise and all-good Paternity he preached was the morose and revengeful thunderer of Mount Sinai. But what the Homilies do prove, is again our assertion that there was a secret doctrine preached by Jesus to the few who were deemed worthy to become its recipients and custodians. And Peter said: ‘We remember that our Lord and teacher, as commanding, said to us, guard the mysteries for me, and the sons of my house. Wherefore also he explained to his disciples, privately, the mysteries of the kingdoms of the heavens.'””
H. P. Blavatsky
The Mark Of God: Understanding Your "I AM Presence" 