GakuseiDon

What do you mean by greater praise? I presume those two were either in Rome or on their way to Rome, so when Paul asks the Romans to greet them, they could actually be greeted.

Duvduv

To single them out as "apostles" who were in Christ before the person whose revelation was direct from Christ, yet the veteran apostles never deserved an expression of admiration or praise?!

GakuseiDon

Sure, why not. Sounds like he is accepting an Academy Award. "And I'd like to thank... Oh darn, I forgot Peter and James!"

Here is most of Romans 16.

Rom 16:1 I commend to you our sister Phoebe, a deacon of the church in Cenchreae...

3 Greet Priscilla and Aquila, my co-workers in Christ Jesus. 4 They risked their lives for me. Not only I but all the churches of the Gentiles are grateful to them.

5 Greet also the church that meets at their house. Greet my dear friend Epenetus, who was the first convert to Christ in the province of Asia.

6 Greet Mary, who worked very hard for you.

7 Greet Andronicus and Junia, my fellow Jews who have been in prison with me. They are outstanding among the apostles, and they were in Christ before I was.

8 Greet Ampliatus, my dear friend in the Lord.

9 Greet Urbanus, our co-worker in Christ, and my dear friend Stachys.

10 Greet Apelles, whose fidelity to Christ has stood the test. Greet those who belong to the household of Aristobulus.

11 Greet Herodion, my fellow Jew. Greet those in the household of Narcissus who are in the Lord.

12 Greet Tryphena and Tryphosa, those women who work hard in the Lord. Greet my dear friend Persis, another woman who has worked very hard in the Lord.

13 Greet Rufus, chosen in the Lord, and his mother, who has been a mother to me, too.

14 Greet Asyncritus, Phlegon, Hermes, Patrobas, Hermas and the other brothers and sisters with them.

15 Greet Philologus, Julia, Nereus and his sister, and Olympas and all the Lord’s people who are with them...

judge

Yes it's astounding. After all just a little later in Galatians this "paul" is lavishing praise on them.

galatians 2:6 As for those who were held in high esteem—whatever they were makes no difference to me; God does not show favoritism—they added nothing to my message

Is that enough reverence and praise?

la70119

I had to look up who Andronicus and Junias were. They were obviously Greek. paul called them "apostles." Yet there is zero evidence that they were ever "witnesses to His resurrection" (Acts 1:22).

It turns out in Orthodox Tradition these two were Apostles who were initially selected to be two of the Seventy (gLuke 10). Yet, no mention of any names in gLuke 10. It would be rather curious that Greeks would be among the Seventy when according to the Canonical record, Jesus did not go out of his way to include Gentiles, and by the same record it took a vision of Animals on a Blanket to convince Peter it was okay to start preaching to Gentiles long after Jesus was gone.

Anyway, according to Orthodox Tradition, Andronicus was the Bishop of Pannonia (Today part of Hungary, Austria, Serbia, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Slovenia, and Slovakia) at a time there were no Bishops. He was also responsible for some terrorist acts which the Romans certainly would have considered as crimen maiestatis.

Destroying Temples. That will definitely get you into trouble with Rome. And they were supposedly wonder-workers. Since they would have already been considered terrorists and superstition-pushers, their "wonder-working" would have been considered to be sorcery. Another big no-no in Ancient Rome.

la70119

It sounds to me he was dissing them. Especially the phrases "whatever they were makes no difference to me" and "they added nothing to my message."

Duvduv

It doesn't sound like it is he who admires and reveres these veterans at all.

sotto voce

As always with Paul, in full context, or in as full context as can be readily mustered.

'I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ, for a different gospel; which is really not another. Because there are some who are disturbing you and want to distort the gospel of Christ [that is, people who want to destroy it with legalism. Not gospel at all, but its antithesis]. But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed! As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, he is to be accursed!

Am I now seeking the favour of men, or of God? Or am I striving to please men? If I were still trying to please men, I would not be a bond-servant of Christ. Because I would have you know, brothers, that the gospel which was preached by me is not according to man. Because I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ.' Gal 1:6-12

The comparison here is not of Paul's gospel rather than that of any other apostle. That is not the problem of the wretched Galatians. They, in Paul's view, have got the poison of the Pharisees, that John the B and Jesus had opposed. Paul called them dogs, Jesus and John called them vipers. That's where the real contradiction lies, not in imagined differences between apostles. So Paul is saying that the Galatians are not defying him personally, or any other apostle, but God himself. Though, just in case they think that Paul is trying it on with his story of personal conversion, or was deluded about it, Paul after this goes on to confirm to the Galatians that his message was no different from that of Cephas, John, Barnabas and James, members of the Jerusalem church, at least three of whom had known Jesus personally, as a man. Paul is emphatic that the message that the Galatians have received is both unified and authentic, and no other 'gospel' should be entertained, even if he, or even an angel, should be the bearer.

Duvduv

"Paul" is saying that unlike anyone else who had the idea of preaching to gentiles HE. got his teachings directly from Christ in heaven. This is obviously far superior than what other Jews had even for themselves because there is nothing to indicate that any other preacher even preaching to Jews got his revelation exclusively from heaven.
Yet Junias and Androcinus enjoy greater esteem in his eyes than even the veteran Jewish apostles in Jerusalem who Paul never describes with awe or reverence.
So it appears that Romans and Galatians were authored by individuals of different beliefs about the revelation. Only in Galatians is it so unequivocal in relation to Paul who got it directly from heaven.

sotto voce

Total, prize-winning, undiluted balderdash.

'Although I am less than the least of all God's people, this grace was given me: to preach to the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ.' Eph 3:8 NIV

Grace! Undeserved benefit!

The fact that he was apostle to Gentiles had no relevance to the means of his spiritual birth, which was anyway a matter of disgrace, not something to be proud of. It was his physical birth, in Tarsus, his familiarity with Greek ideas, and his Roman citizenship, that made him the obvious choice to go to the Gentiles. And in Jerusalem, that was picking the short straw. Going to the dogs, if you like.