I'm talking about knowledge and history in the modern senses, the ones that were defined by the revolutions of modernity (by the Protestant Reformation, Renaissance, Scientific Revolution, Enlightenment, the American and French Revolutions, and the transition from feudalism to capitalism).

None of those revolutions were "natural," so Paul's rhetoric there seems quaint. Modernity was what you would call a hubristic revolt against the natural order. The revolt was humanistic, as opposed to giving nature the power over us, which is what happened in the premodern, theocratic, feudal regimes that were allegedly devoted to something supernatural. Religions provided the propaganda and the excuses to maintain natural dominance hierarchies in human societies.

Christian egalitarianism is unnatural in that respect, but it's also utopian without a concrete, humanistic realization. That's what modernity was supposed to provide.