One must remember that early Christians were a prosecuted minority, and often had to watch their words and actions very closely. One could also interpret these passages as a subtle attack on St. Paul's preaching to the Gentiles. The first hundred years or so after the death of Jesus may be compared to the history of communism in which various interpretations jockeyed for power in the successive Internationals.

Compounding the whole problem of interpretation is that Jesus did not write anything himself, so we have even his reputed words second-hand and thus subject to the hearer's memory and interpretation.

Not even secondhand, because the authors of the gospels did not personally know him either. By the time the gospels were written, 50-100 years after the death of Jesus, his words had already become traditions.

On the other hand, people have given me bits of wisdom I wasn't prepared to understand at the time... but I figured it out later, and I appreciated that they bothered with me... they gave me a pearl.

Matthew 7:6

Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.
KJV

This is one of those verses that I struggled with for a while but I am now coming to understand. In the past I have not been a fan of secrecy and reticence. I thought it better for everything to be out in the open. But recently I have come to understand how necessary it is even in matters relatively mundane.

The verse does suggest a sort of esoteric undertone to Christianity which is also intriguing. Perhaps some secret oral tradition existed which is now lost or perhaps it is still being passed along from master to student.

Another interesting verse in the same vein.
Matthew 10:16

Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves.
KJV

Does anyone have any insights on the reticent, silent and esoteric side of Christianity? Does it still exist today in the modern churches? Do we really know what Christians are up to? These maxims are likely much older than Christianity. Any insights on the maxims considered apart from Christianity?

What type of person is a dog? What type of person is a pig?

Matthew 7:6
Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.

The verse does suggest a sort of esoteric undertone to Christianity which is also intriguing. Perhaps some secret oral tradition existed which is now lost or perhaps it is still being passed along from master to student.

Another interesting verse in the same vein.
Matthew 10:16

Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves.

Does anyone have any insights on the reticent, silent and esoteric side of Christianity? Does it still exist today in the modern churches? Do we really know what Christians are up to? These maxims are likely much older than Christianity. Any insights on the maxims considered apart from Christianity?

Compounding the whole problem of interpretation is that Jesus did not write anything himself, so we have even his reputed words second-hand and thus subject to the hearer's memory and interpretation. Now while people were accustomed to listening and remembering what they had heard, the other side of the coin is that many of the hearers were hardly intellectually sophisticated---perhaps that is why much of Jesus's teachings were in parables.

Not even secondhand, because the authors of the gospels did not personally know him either. By the time the gospels were written, 50-100 years after the death of Jesus, his words had already become traditions.

Uh... I'm sure you must know there was divine intervention involved. God told the disciples what to write. So, technically, the bible is written secondhand by the disciples (quoting God).

And some people believe this means that it was written firsthand by God. So, let's just say it was.

Does this mean that wisdom, knowledge, an idea, can be destroyed if you tell the wrong person?

If so, wouldn't that be a fear based assumption? If so, was that what the Christ was instilling when he supposedly spoke these words? Fear has no place in omniscience, omnipresence and omnipotence so it just doesn't fit, at least for me.

I suppose fear can be a pedagogical tool. Not a very good one in my opinion. It's kind of a scary verse. There's lots of fear based rhetoric in the bible. And I am aware that I am being a bit superstitious.

When reading the bible I like to think of it as an authoritative text. I like to pretend that it must be true and then try to figure out what it meant. This starts as pretend for me but sometimes it yields interesting results. Suspension of disbelief. Of course this is the sort of thing that medieval philosophers had to do as well.

Ones understanding of an idea does change when it is opened up for others to comment on. What's to say the idea can't be destroyed?

The post-enlightenment scientific paradigm believes that anyone who doesn't open up their ideas to peer review is a quack or hiding some results that disprove the theory. Everything out in the open. Yet science has its own biases and exposing an idea for peer review will be at the mercy of these biases. This same ethic bleeds over into the general public as well and the general public has even more biases than the supposedly objective scientific community.

Also, secrets are knowledge of a special type. A secret's value, its power, lies in the fact that not everyone knows it. If anyone is allowed access to it, its power is lost. Is the pearl knowledge or is the pearl the power associated with that knowledge?

I answer that, A man of counsel may be taken in two ways. First, from his being willing or anxious to take counsel. And thus fear makes men of counsel. Because, as the Philosopher says (Ethic. iii, 3), "we take counsel on great matters, because therein we distrust ourselves." Now things which make us afraid, are not simply evil, but have a certain magnitude, both because they seem difficult to repel, and because they are apprehended as near to us, as stated above (Question [42], Article [2]). Wherefore men seek for counsel especially when they are afraid.
Secondly, a man of counsel means one who is apt for giving good counsel: and in this sense, neither fear nor any passion makes men of counsel. Because when a man is affected by a passion, things seem to him greater or smaller than they really are: thus to a lover, what he loves seems better; to him that fears, what he fears seems more dreadful. Consequently owing to the want of right judgment, every passion, considered in itself, hinders the faculty of giving good counsel.

Matthew 7:6

Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.
KJV
What type of person is a dog? What type of person is a pig?

. The religious person makes some things axiomatic through a confession of faith. These creeds are less open to interpretation than other things. The skeptic will spend his/her time refuting and mulling over these axioms and assertions and probably never believing any of them. The religious person thus has a great advantage or a great disadvantage. If the principles of the creed are true then the religious person will be able to proceed further into the matter and get a more in depth understanding. If those axioms and assertions are completely false then the religious person is headed down one of the many dead ends in the maze of truth.