Ben Smith wrote:
Whom does Paul clearly put into that category, in your estimation, besides himself?
Peter, in Gal. 1.19, and in Gal. 2.8 if authentic, as I have taken it to be. And, of course, as you allow in the question, Paul insisted on his own status as an apostle.
Is Romans 16.7 clear about Andronicus and Junia?
I think Paul probably meant Andronicus and Junia are among the apostles, rather than they are noted by the apostles, but I realize that is disputable and disputed.
Is 1 Corinthians 4.9 clear about Apollos? Philippians 2.25 is clear about Epaphroditus, but is an apostle of the church at Philippi ("your") the same as an apostle of God or of Christ?
No, I don't think Paul wants to allow either Apollos or Epaphroditus the status of apostle of God or Christ. Epaphroditus is the apostle/messenger of the church of Philippi, not of God.
Is 1 Thessalonians 2.7 clear about Timothy and/or Silvanus, going all the way back to 1.1?
1 Thess. is an interesting case. I think Paul seems to include Timothy and/or Silvanus with himself as apostles because he's speaking loosely, or perhaps because it was an early letter and he did not yet see the potential danger of granting others of his co-workers (i.e., beyond the faithful Timothy) a title or status equal to his own.
Galatians 1.19 seems clear about Cephas, but that is the same verse that seems to imply that James, too, belongs to what is apparently a group, to judge from 1.17, of apostles whom could be visited at Jerusalem. Galatians 2.8 is clear about Peter, but I am not sure that verse is original to the text.
I take Gal. 2.8 to be Pauline, and I think Paul is deliberately putting James' status in question.
On the other hand, in 1 Corinthians 9.5 Cephas seems to fall outside the group of apostles, just as he seems to fall outside the group of brethren of the Lord.
I would say this is the use of KAI to mean “and especially” or “and most importantly” as in “the Spartans and Leonidas” or “his disciples and Peter” in Mark 16.7. The individual after the KAI is being singled out as especially important, not necessarily excluded from the group(s) that preceded his mention.
(I am serious about these questions; they are not rhetorical; I have noticed before how difficult it is to determine exactly who is an apostle, according to Paul.)
I take what you say seriously, Ben, and I hope I have not given a different impression.
I'm not suggesting that there was some official list of who was and was not a real apostle in Paul's time, I'm just considering who Paul recognized as an apostle. I think many, outside of the churches Paul founded, probably did not consider Paul a real apostle. And some of the people Paul does not call apostles were considered apostles by others. I think Paul was very unwilling to admit that there are other apostles in the churches he founded. He can allow Andronicus and Junia in are apostles because he's writing to the Romans and he can grant them the title without undermining the authority he claims for himself in his own territory and because he cannot claim any special authority there himself, not having founded the church in Rome.
Best,
Ken