1. Justin knew Paul's letters and
2. Justin regarded Paul as proto-orthodox.
In the three letters attributed to Justin -- First Apology, Second Apology and Dialogue with Trypho -- Justin doesn't mention Paul at all, which leads to speculation about what this means. I've clipped below three recent comments from various sources on this:
When we read Justin we can see he knows Marcion, to whom he refers a couple of times:
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/t ... ology.html
"These men" are Marcion, and Simon and Menander of Samaria, whose followers all call themselves "Christians". Justin is telling the Roman Emperor and Senate that there are "bad" Christians inspired by demons.
Irenaeus, writing perhaps 25 years later, notes that Justin wrote a "Treatise against Marcion", from which he quotes. Eusebius seems to have been aware of Justin's work against Marcion as well.
Can Justin have been aware of Marcion without being aware of Paul's letters? I doubt it very much. I think it is almost certain that Justin was aware of Paul's letters.
Might Justin have thought that Marcion's version of Paul's letters were the authentic ones, so avoided referring to Paul (as "the apostle to the heretics"), as per one of the comments I provided above?
I don't think it's likely. Irenaeus refers to Justin as well as Paul in his works against heresies a few times, citing botn against Marcion. Neither Irenaeus nor later writers who refer to Justin ever imply Justin had such a view about Paul as far as I'm aware. Justin's work critical of Marcion seems to have survived to Eusebius at the least. Given the importance of Paul to Marcion, any work critical of Marcion would surely have included a view of Paul as well. As an anti-Marcionite, Justin would have been aware that there was a Marcion version of Paul's letters and a proto-orthodox version. It fits the evidence better that Justin took the proto-orthodox version of Paul as the 'authentic' one.
So, why didn't Justin refer to Paul in his letters? I think we in modern times see Paul's shadow looming over early Christianity to such an extant that it is difficult to not think ancient people thought the same.
But in reality the name "Paul" wouldn't have meant much to the Roman Emperors and Senate in the 150s CE. I can't see any reason why Justin would include references to Paul in that context in his First Apology and Second Apology.
The Dialogue with Trypho might have been a more relevant work to quote Paul, but even there I can't see why his character Trypho might have been impressed by references to Paul's letters. Justin uses some quotes from the Old Testament that Paul also quoted, but surely the Old Testament would have been more authoritative than Paul. Why quote Paul's use of the OT when Justin can use the source?
Any thoughts, pro or con?