Is there a such thing as Apostlic Christian and Pauline

jay88

I hit enter before I was finished. The Question was Is there a such thing as Apostolic Christianity or is it lumped together with Pauline Christianity?

Do you mean apostic or apostolic? Pauline just means it was written by Paul. Several of the books attributed to him through tradition were actually written by people trying to claim Paul's reputation. It may have not been fraudulent. There were different views of authorship. Knowing that scholars don't believe that several books were written by him, I notice a clear difference in the writing style.

peacefulpete

Another complicated question. First Pauline. Yes there were and are sects of Christianity who favored Paul's Christology over the idea of a Christ cast in the role of OT prophet come recently. Marcionite Christianity , once a hugely popular sect, renounced the OT as the work of a demented demiurge and was apparently the sole compiler and preserver of Paul's letters for about a century. In fact some suspect Marcion was the author or redactor of much of them. They had their own version of the Gospel Luke and others had many other Gospels filled with more esoteric sayings that were held to contain the mysteries of the Christ.

By "Apostolic" I asume you mean the schools of Christianity that were responsible for the Synoptics (Mark,Matt,Luke). These were more driven to historize the narratives but differed in many ways about the role of the Jewish Law and details of the stories. G.John represents Johanine Christianity and has many unique characteristics that don't identify closely with either the sects that produced the Synoptics or Pauline literature.

As far as the Apostles as such they are a unique study in themselves. In my research I've concluded that a few were likely actual historical persons who led some sect in Jerusalem (whether they ever met a Jesus is another question) while others seem to be pure literary necessities or historical Jewish persons re-envisioned to be Christians. Even on this rather basic point the Gospels differ in identifying the 12. So..........

jay88

I guess my question then would be what would Christianity be today without Paul?

peacefulpete

Very true. Modern forms of Christianity all passed through the bottleneck of the dominant orthoxy (what became the Catholic church) and hence most all have found some manner of harmonization of the NT Canon (including the Pauline and Deutero-Paulines) as the Church determined it. The average Christian would never recognize the many sects of Christianity exisiting in the early centuries CE as Christian.

Band on the Run

apostolic can also mean the apostolic succession of bishops. All bishops are in an unbroken line back to the apostles.

I've read much about Eastern Christianity and Asian Christianity in wikipedia recently. Different regions claims their own apostles. St. Thomas evidently found churches in at least a couple of cities in India. We tend to think only of Western Christianity. The early church councils and fathers were Middle Eastern, not Western. It is many generations before the Bishop of Rome becomes notable.

BurnTheShips

Is there a such thing as Apostlic Christian and Pauline

Paul is an apostle. I fail to see the real distinction.

It is many generations before the Bishop of Rome becomes notable.

That is actually not the case. The Bishop of Rome is notable from the very beginning, even if we exclude Peter.

BTS

PSacramento

If there is one church that can claim "apostolic sucession" it is the RCC, though I am sure the eastern orthodox one can also, I think.

BurnTheShips

Yes, the Eastern churches can as well.

BTS

Is there a such thing as Apostlic Christian and Pauline

Share this