Celsus on the original unity of the Christians

[Giuseppe]

It is very singular that in this point it is a Christian apologist to defend the existence of original Christian sectarian divisions and not the Pagan polemist.

Chapter 11

He says, in addition, that all the Christians were of one mind, not observing, even in this particular, that from the beginning there were differences of opinion among believers regarding the meaning of the books held to be divine. At all events, while the apostles were still preaching, and while eye-witnesses of (the works of) Jesus were still teaching His doctrine, there was no small discussion among the converts from Judaism regarding Gentile believers, on the point whether they ought to observe Jewish customs, or should reject the burden of clean and unclean meats, as not being obligatory on those who had abandoned their ancestral Gentile customs, and had become believers in Jesus. Nay, even in the Epistles of Paul, who was contemporary with those who had seen Jesus, certain particulars are found mentioned as having been the subject of dispute—viz., respecting the resurrection, and whether it were already past, and the day of the Lord, whether it were near at hand or not. Nay, the very exhortation to avoid profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called: which some professing, have erred concerning the faith, is enough to show that from the very beginning, when, as Celsus imagines, believers were few in number, there were certain doctrines interpreted in different ways (Contra Celsum 3:11)

What if Celsus had reason? In that case, Christianity became divided only after the 70, a view held also by Rylands. Origen takes for pre-70 reasons of "division" only questions about prophecies and using Paul as evidence of pre-70 conflicts that were very serious. But if Celsus is right, then Galatians was very post-70, reflecting more late and more dramatic divisions (about the same goodness of the Creator?). "Paul" may be the symbol of the Gentile Christian who becomes apostle by received grace and not "by works", and naturally declassed when these "works" did count among them also the knowledge of a historical Jesus (in a later time).

[Giuseppe]

If Celsus is right, then there was no real need for Paul to limit the number of apparitions of the Risen Christ in 1 Cor 15, in order to contrast possible new rival self-proclaimed apostles. But all the Christian apostles saw the same celestial archangel, before the 70. In this sense they were "of one mind".

The same name "Paul" alludes to discord and conflict: he is the More Little One (gentile) who contrasts the presumed "Great Apostles" (Jews). Is he post-70 ?