The apostles and the Twelve: A study of the apostle-concept in the New Testament

PDF

Download

Open document

Flip pages

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content THE APOSTLES AND THE TWELVE : A STUDY OF THE APOSTLE-CCNCE^T IN THE NEW TESTAMENT by Dale Jay Townsend I A Thesis Presented to the FACULTY OP THE GRADUATE SCHOOL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA In Partial Fulfillmait of the Requirements for the Degree MASTER OP ARTS (Religion) June 1966 UMI Number: EP65307 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Disssftation Publishing UMI EP65307 Published by ProQuest LLC (2014). Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106 - 1346 UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA TH E GRADUATE SCHOOL. U N IV E R S ITY PARK LOS ANGELES 7, C A LIFO R N IA 8 ’ hJ’ T m This thesis, w ritte n by under the direction of h ^ ...T h e s is Committee, and approved by a ll its members, has been p re sented to and accepted by the Dean o f The Graduate School, in p a rtia l fu lfillm e n t o f the requirements fo r the degree of ........Matæsr..QÊ.ArtSL,................... JuDe 1 9 6 6 Dean Date. THESIS GQMMITTEE 2-S3— 2M— G 4 Tmm OF oatmmB Chuter Page I ♦ INTRODUCriCN........................... 1 II, ETYMOLOGY OF anooTOIoo..... ............ 6 The Greek Backgixïund The Hebrew Background III. THE TWELVE............. 15 The Question of the Historicity of The Twelve The Mission of The Twelve Significance of the Number Twelve The Twelve in Mark The Twelve in Matthew The Tvfâlve in Ihfce-Acts The Fixed Character of The TXvelve IV. THE APOSTLES. ............................ 29 J^pearances of airoaxoXoo in the New Testament The Bfeaning of awoaxoXoa in the New Testament The i^postles in Acts: The Question of "The College of the Twelve %x)stles" xr TABIE OF OONTENTS V, THE PIAOE OF PAUL.. ............ 38 Paul and The IWelve The pre-Pauline View of the Office of an Apostle The Pauline View of the Office of an Apostle An Apostle to tte Gentiles An Jostle of Jesus Christ The post-Pauline View of the Office of an Apostle BXBUOGBAPHY............ 50 XXX CHAPTER I INTRODÜCTIW It seams safe to say that tdien the average man. hears the ex pression "the apostles" his mind autanatically œnters on the nurriber twelve. He is oanditioned to identifying the idea of "the apostles" with the original nmher of disciples reportedly appointed by Jesus to do his work and to carry out his plans after his departure. Further more, because of this conditioning, this same person might show surprise xdien he is instructed that the term "apostle" is used in the New Testament much more broadly than just in reference to the original twelve. The tendency to limit the apostles of Jesus to a specific number is not new. In fact, its beginnings are to be found in the New Testament, particularly in the later writings. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the prc±>lona of the relationship between "the twelve," "the ^x>stles," and "the twelve ^sostles." Naturally, stating the problem in this fashion implies an intention to trace the develc^ment frcxn simple to cmplex. But this is 2 not the case. As a matter of fact, the problem at hand is not one of movement from sinple to cxmplex, but rather frcxn fluid to solid, from a time when, for Christians the word apostle was not necessarily re stricted in its application, to a turn when, at least for some, it referred to one of the original twelve. The point of departure for our stiady, that is the place in the New Testament vâiere the problem is set out in bold relief, is I Corin thians 15:3-8. In this passage Paul is giving to his readers a list of persons and groug)s of persons to whom the risen Lord appeared. For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scariptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. Then he speared to more than five hundred brethren at one time, ... Then he appeared to Janes, then to all the apostles. Last of all, ... he appeared also to im. This statemait, xAen viewed closely, provokes a multitude of questions: 'Why, for example, differentiate between Cejtes, the twelve, and the apostles? Certainly Cephas was included in both of the latter two groins. What is the meaning of "all the apostles"? Is this grorp dis tinguished from "the twelve" as early as the time to which Paul seems to be referring? Are not "the twelve" among the groijp referred to as "all the apostles"? Before Paul lists the successive ^pearanoes of the risen Lord, he informs his readersl that this is part of the tradition which he ^I Corinthians 15:3. 3 himself had received, and that he is merely passing it on to them in much the same way as he had received it. He puts no i^cial premium on any of the words, and reveals no particular problem existing in his own mind as to the identity of the persons to whom the risen lord was manifested. Although, of course, he does mention Cephas by nane. In brief, at this point in Paul's ministry the problem of the apostleship had not arisen. What Paul received in the tradition about the resurrection of Jesus and those to tdiom he appeared, he gives to others* In that tradition are to be found categories which at the time of the coiposi- tion of I Corinthians^ are not yet solid categories of Christian ecclesiastical thought— categories as those mentioned above, the twelve, the apostles, etc. Whatev^ content these terms had is not made clear in the context at hand. We must except, however, the term "the twelve," which no doubt was a fixed noticm within the early church, as we will discuss below. It is the expression "all the apostles" which is especially important for our study. At this point, it is a fluid reference to an undefined grorp of early Christians dis tinguish^ in a way that is not ooipletely clear to us. One thing is clear, however. "The twelve," and "all the apostles" are not identical groups. The former does in no way exhaust the latter. ^Considered to have been written about 55 or 56 A.D. by A. H. Mafeile, m Introduction to the Study of the'New Testament (2d ed. rev. : 0>icr3 tElversIt Ï953), p. Ï2%. 4 The point of view that is taken in this paper is that the groups |of persons referred to Paul in the passage at hand, especially "the twelve" and "all the apostles," are referred to in such a way as to re- . fleet a pre-Pauline understanding of their identity# Paul is uncriti- j ! cal in his handing dcwn of the tradition; he makes no evaluation of the| I place witliin the realm of apostolic ministry of those mentioned# The warfare over the right to be called an apostle, %hich warfare brought out a view of apostleship that seems to us uniquely Pauline, had not yet become full-blown# Then, as time goes on, especially after the death of Paul, we see Paul's view «nerge as virtually the only view. His understanding of the office of an apostle triurrphs over any alter native view, and in the later New Testammt literature, the original twelve are seen as apostles in the Pauline sense. To prove the thesis stated above is not as easy as it is to state it. Obscurity of many of the details relevant to this matter .makes judgment difficult. There is often an over-lapping of terms vhich we would like to be "clear-cut" in meaning at every instance. But apart from this, sufficient material is at our disposal to allow the judgment that the development from "the twelve" through "all the apostles" to "the twelve apostles" cm be traced. At least we can know the route it followed. The plan of this study is not to follow a three-fold develop ment, as mentioned above— pre-Pauline, Pauline, and post-pauline. But it is hoped that the final synthesis will justify stating it here in this fashion. 5 The procedure we will follow in the remainder of the paper is one that seems necessary by the nature of the study. We will investi gate the place in the early churdh of the original twelve disciples of ! Jesus— "the tsælve." Then we will npve to a stu<% of the use of the I term "jostle" and the ways it is employed by New Testament writers. | And finally, we will lock into the place of Paul and his view of apostlesliip, concluding with a final synthesis in an atta^rpt to justify our thesis. But because of its great importance to a study of this kind, a preliminary section must be devoted to the question of the derivation of the word "apostle." OmPTER II ETÏMDLOGY OF àirocrToXo 0 The Greek background.— In seeking to determine the meaning of à-rroaToXoG as it is used in tte New Testaramt, there is little help to be found in the Greek background of the word. Rengstorf shows^ that in Classical Greek and Hellenism airo^ToXoa is used primarily in associa tion with sea-faring terminology and military expeditions. He further insists that in Greek literature, an outstanding feature of all the meanings of airoaxoXoa is their predominantly passive character. In none of them do we find any suggestion either of initia tive on the part of the airooxoXoo or of authorisaticm linked with the mission. The most that can be said is that the word denotes the quality of being smt, unless we are to regard it as no more than a stereotyped term. 2 %. H. Rengstorf, ” 0 1 1 6 0x0X00," TIMIt, ed. Gerhard Kittel, trans. Geoffrey W* Bromiley (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdnans Rub. Co., 1964) I, î407f. In agreement with this view is Kirsopp lake, "The Ttvelve and |The %ostles," The Beginnings of Christianity, eds. F. J. Foakes Jack- i son and Kirsc^pnLaEe(lHHonT‘ "TlTelteaHIIanCo., 1920-1933) V, 46. ^Rengstorf, loc. cit. 7 There are two passages in Herodotus^ an the basis of vhich one might take issue with teigstorf's sweeping generalization. But on close ex amination, the conclusion seems imperative that, whereas 0 1 1 6 0x 0X 00 is rendered "envoy" and "embassy," the emphasis falls on "the quality of being sent," and not on the person himself or liis authority as an 0 1 1 6 0x 0X00. With reference to messengers, envoys, or legal representatives, the Greeks, ratlier than 0 1 1 6 0x0X00, would have chosen designations like 0YYGXo0,^ icfipoc,^ npE0gEuxn 0. "Thus," concludes Kengstorf, "its later Christian usage was an innovation to 0c. ears or to those familiar with Gk. . . ."^ In the world of Greek religion there were, to be sure, religious messengers. However, instead of 0 1 1 0 0x 0X01, such messengers are usual ly described as npo(#nx 0i. They belong to the sanctuary and speak 21; V, 38. The LXX provides a good exanple of this. With the exception of I Kings 14:6, where Ahijah is referred to as an 0 1 1 6 0x0X00, a læssenger in the strictly religious sense, * 0YyeXo0 is used almost exclusively in this regard. Lake, loc. cit. observes that "this is the more remark- { able because the LKK uses 0 7 1 0 0x 6XXw almost to the exclusion of neyirw, j and 0 1 1 6 0x0X00 would have been expected as the correlative substantive, j but ^YYcXo0 semts to have bœn consistently preferred." | %oteworthy is that fact that in Herodotus I, 21, already re ferred to above, KnpuÇ is found, and bears much the same meaning as the later Christian usage of etnooxoXoo. ^Ra^gstorf, op. cit., p. 408. 8 truth for the deity into the ears of the believer vto is waiting anxiously to receive kncwl^ge. But here there is no sen^ of mission, no commission which relates to a persm or historical reality, no claim of personal authority on the part of the wpo4>nTn0.^ The personality of the proclairaer within Greek, religion is of no particular ircportanœ. In fact, there is a complete surrender of his "consciousness and per sonality to the deity.The marked distance between the irpo(|>nTrta in Gceeic religion and the ^11 60x0X 00 in the Christian church is quite evident. One element of Gr^k life— the cynic-Stoic philosophers— does to some extent constitute an exception to the foregoing. They were strongly conscious of mission; they were authorized by Zeus. But the word 0iTO 0xoXoi is not used in reference to than. Instead, th^ are called Kaxa 0Koiroi Again the vast difference between the Cynic-Stoic K 0xa 0jcoTTO 0 and the Christian airoaxoXoa is clearly seen. The Kaxaatcoirot j (spies) were set, by Zeus, to the overseeing of the conduct of others. I The H^rew background. — Among modem sctolars, it is probably I J. B. Lightfoot^O Wio first drew attention to the fact that 0 1 1 6 0x0X00 I ; in the Mew Testament is closer in meaning to the Areeaaic shaliah than ^Ibid. ^Ibid., p. 409. ^Ibid., p. 410. ^^Saint Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians (Londan: Maomillan and Co., 1890)7 p. 93..... ' j to any otiier word in the ancient world. In making this suggesticxi, Lightfoot does, however, tread lightly. He will nerely assert that "a little more light, and yet not much more, is thrown on the subject by the use of the term amcsig the Jews."^^ But with considerably less caution, this thesis has been defended and enlarged by Vogelsteini^ who finds the roots of the apostle-conoept in the Pmrsian period. The Shaliah was a legal and eœlesiastical institution, and he to Whom the title was given was an authorized representative of the one by whom he was sent. Such persons might represent individuals or corporate bodies such as courts and synogagues, their duties depending rpon the terms of their ooimdLssion— to serve legal documents, collect moneys, convey instructicxis, particularly with r^ard to the calendar or festivals. In the ^n^ogues the shaliah might be the leader of the congregation in prayer. The rabbinic principle that ’a man’s shali^ is like to himself’ « • . states tte obvious truth that a perscm vho follows his instruc tions points the responsibility for his actions to his authorizing agent. It does not define the status of the shaliah so much as it does his function, The principle that one’s messenger, his emissary, his shaliah, is to be GonsiderW "like to himself," can œrtainly be found in the Old Testa ment. For exairple, in I Samuel 25, when David SŒids messengei^ to woo Abigail to become his wife after the death of Nafoal, Abigail washes lllbid. ^%Iermann Vogelstein, "The Development of the Apostolate in Judaism and its Transformation in Christianity," HDCA, II (1925), 99-123. Significant also is the article by Frank Gavin, "Shaliach and Apostolos," ATR, IX (1927), 250-259. H. Shepherd, Jr., "Apostles," IIB, ed. George A. Buttrick (New York: Abingdon Press, 1962) , 1, 171. 10 the feet of the messengers. Also in II Sarmael 10, David sends messen gers to the Amonite Hanian to console him at the death of his father. But vten they arrive, Hanun humiliates them. This results in a war because David is personally shamed. Whereas the messengers in these cases do not have technical designations, indicatir^ a full-blown in- stitutim, the principle mentioned above can certainly be seen. And j looking forward briefly to the New Testament, the principle can be ;seen there also. In Matthew 10:40 we have these words: "He who re ceives you receives me, and he tdio receives me receives him who sent me." This passage in Matthew strcmgly suggests an awareness of the developed form of the offiœ of the shaliah, for in the same context (10:2), appears the only usage by Matthew of airdaToXoa. As has beai indicated, the beginnings of the shaliah as an institutioniS are traced by Vogelstein and others to the Persian per iod. Vogelstein notesi^ that in the Passover letter of Darius II, part i%upra, p. 9. i%ith reference to speaking of jshaliah as an institution, a Iword of caution is in order. It must not Be stçjposed that there exist- ]ed during the Persian period an office with the technical designation gmliah. Vogelstein himself, cit., p. 102», is quick to point out SiatT '^e occurence [ sic] which we are discussing took place at a time in which the terminology of offices and duties had just been formed and jwas still in its initial state." Furthermore, it is imperative to men- jticm that the shaliah, as the official r^resentative of another, of a king or TAhCTaevSc 7"vms only so described as he acted in the carrying out ■of specific details of a ^jecific commission. There is no idea of a continuation of his office as shali^ b&^ond the limits of the specific ccsrmissim. Vogelstein remarks, ifegd., p. 101., in reference to the mission of Ezra, as described in Ezra 7zl2ff., that "it assigned to the representative a fixed and definite circle of activities. Ezra’s |authority expired with the conpletion of the three-fold task #iich had been assigned to him." ! , p. 100. iX of the Elephantine papyri, dating from about 419 B. C., Hananiah, the bearer of the letter, is referred to as the plenipotentiary of the king, his shaliah. Further evidence is drawn from the interaction of Ezra and Nehemiah with the Persian goverrsnent.^^ From its beginnings in Persian political affairs, the conœpt of the plenipotentiary re presentative, designated shaliah, whose activities were described by the cognate forms of the same word, became the pattern "for the castles, the oomaissaries of the religious administrative authorities at Jerusalem. * * The developïîent of the shaliah-oonoept continued among the Jews until, as is shewn by Frank Gavin,by the first Christian century and earlier it carries very technical overtones. Gavin cites numerous rai±»inic sources in which the High Priest and other religious func tionaries are called by the name shaliah, in #ilch cases the word is us^ in the sense of ploiipotentiary representative. Following the destruction of the Ten^le, Gavin ranarks,^® we have "the ai^arance of ’congregational apostles, • Wio, ... were set aside by the various ccmraunities to deliver their contributions to headquarters." The problem of J@mdsh missionaries has been part of most dis cussions of the relationship of Hebrew institutions and the Christian ^^Ibid., pp. lOlff* 1 A Ibid., p. 106. 19 22" pp. 253ff. ^^Ibid., p. 255. 12 apostolate. Hamack attœpted^i to build his case for the Christian missionary-apostles frcm the fact that there existed in Jewish circles those who travelled about undertaking tasks that were primarily of a religious nature. But it does not seem too likely that these "mis sionaries” had much affinity with the itinerate preachers (apostles) of the Christian ccmmmity. At least it is not likely their function was evangelistic in nature. Their work prcbafoly involved, more than anything else, and as Hamack himself admits,keeping Jerusalem "in touch with the Diaspora." The extent to vÆiich these Jewish mission aries served as preachers was most likely in direct proportion to the need to counter Christian prc^mganda. In reflecting skepticism about the close affinity of the Jewish missionaries with the Christian missionaries, it is not intended that the fact be deniW of the existence of proselytizing on the part of the Jews, a fact vÆdch is clearly seen in Jesus’ reported denunciation of the scribes and Pharisees for their faulty work along this line.^^ It is merely contended that the Jewish missicmary activities being carried on during Jesus’ time were private in character, having no 2lAdolf Hamack, The Mission, and Expansion Christianity in the First Three■ ' Centuries, ""Sc^'s.' James'&%att ' fed' rev. ; New ^ YoSc: G. P. Putnam^s Sons, 1908), I, 327ff. 22ibid., p. 328 ^^This is strongly suggested in Justin. See his Dialogue with Trypho, CVIII- ^^Matthew 23:15. 13 j official, ooRmimity-authorized dimension. For our purposes here it is inportant to notice the report of Bægstorf^^ to the effect that neither th& nouns shaliah and dirooToXoe, nor their verb forms play any part in the labors of the Jewish missionaries. The fact that there is lacking in Jewish missionary work a "quality of being sent," which would be inpHed in the words ^laliah and d i r out 0X 00, is no doubt due to the fact that, within the framework of the Jewish consciousness of election and the rather assured position granted them thereby, there was no special need to spread their faith to others. Even where there was missionary activity carried on, its meaning was found more in a personal merit for the missionary than in any notion of a universal salvation. There are two things that can be concluded from the foregoir^ study of the background of the New Testament use of the word 0 1 1 6 0x0X00; (1) The word itself is GreWc, but its use by the Gr^ks is vague and provides us with little help in determining its meaning in the New Testam^t. (2) The basic meaning of airooxoXoo— messenger, plenipoten tiary representative, authorized agent, is derived from the Jewish in- ^^op. cit., p. 418. ^^Ibid., p. 419. Rengstorf here (n. 77) quotes frcm a Midrash. *If anyoneloring a creature (i.e., a man) imder the wings of the she- kinah (i.e., makes him a proselyte), it is reckoned unto him (i.e., by God) as if he had created and form^ and fashioned it. * It should be clear, therefore, that Jewish missionaries had little in cannon with Christian airooxoXoi. Johannes Btock, "Paul, the Apostles, and the Twelve," STh, III (1949), 100., warns that "too much inporfcance has for some tire been attached to these Jewish apostles. ... The Christian apostles are part of something entirely new, and dynamic, in that the whole Christian religion is something to be spread abroad." Also Shep herd, loc. cit., adds "that the shaliah, unlike the later Christian apostle,’ has no . . . missionary responsibility." 14 stitution of the shaliah. It must be kept in mind, however, that we are speaking of a basic meaning; the particular kind of messenger, his status, and his function are significantly changed by Christian usage. This is not to say that in Christian usage we have a new content given I to an older term,^^ nor that there is a direct borrowing of a term from Jews by Christians.But it does not seooa possible to escape the oon- I elusion that, just as the local congregation in the early church, for I i©sanple, was fashioned after the Jewish ^magogue, even so other in- jstituticns, including the apostolate, i«?ere fashioned after Jewish pre cedents. Vogelstein* s observations serve well to summarize. These instituticns derive their own peculiar impress frcm the character of the religious organization, but in their g^tesis and in their original fom they depend for the origin of the religious organization upon what is in exist ence and in evid^ce at the time.29 James Barr, Tte Seman-^cs of Biblical Language (London: Oxford Uhiversity Press, 196lTr"p7*2Wrr*^tutSîs*agaaj^t^13îfâlïdsiise of the notion of oontent, * with regard to important New Testament words. He insists that it is more a case of words beooming technical as they are enoployed^by New Testament writers. He argues tibat this is true in the ca^ of cnroaxoXoa, 28, jn 29 'Gavin, op. cit., p. 258., shows that such a conclusion cannot be drawn (i.e., “ ^airect borrowing”) without problems. Vogelstein, op. cit., p. 110. CHAPTER III THE TWELVE In this ch^îter, "the twelve" will foe discussed, with particular attmiticm given to certain general questions ^30ut than and a brief survey of the various ways they are treated by Hew Testament writers. The question of the historicity of the twelve.— Did Jesus really choose twelve disciples for special responsibilities, or was this number the product of the church at a later time? Bultraann takes the view that the twelve were created by the dhurch and reflect “the eschatological consciousness of the church? for they are *the Twelve’ not as apostles but as the eschatological r^ents."^ And furthermore, the less likely it is that Jesus did call them, the greater inportanoe do they have in underscoring the escha tological consciousness of the church at a later time.^ It is irpossible to argue with Bultmann on whether the deeds of the twelve have largely been colored by the post-Easter church, but it "^Rudolf Bultmann, Theology of the New Testament, trans. Kendrick Grobel (Hew York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1951-1955), I, 37. ^Ibid. --- 25 16 does not seem necessary to say that the twelve did not exist as a dis tinct gror^ during the lifetime of Jesus. "The twelve disciples are scarcely the creation of the post-Easter church, as has been suggested, though they had certainly a representative significance in the earliest years. In sr^jport of this ccmtention, and against the skeptical view of Bultmann, several points can be offered. First of all, and perhaps the simplest thing that can be said, is brought out by Taylor,'^ namely, that the idea of the twelve is too deeply ingrained in the entire Synoptic tradition. Furthermore, as is suggested by Bomkamm,^. if the idea of the twelve had arisen in the Apostolic age, it is doubtful that any list of their nartes would have included that of Judas Iscariot. In that regard, Judas is not only named in each of the Synoptic lists, but is specifically designated "one of the Twelve."^ Of importance also is Hebert’s observation^ that the e2 q>ression "the twelve" occurs in only two places^ outside the Gospels. Suoely, if the twelve were entirely a product of the later church, the literary precedent would be found more ^Gunther Bomkamm, Jesus of Nazareth, trans. Irene and Fraser MoLu^y with James M. Robinson (Mew YoiicPHarp^ and Brothers, 1960), p. 150. ^Vincent Taylor, The Go^l According to St. Mark, (london: Macmillan and Co., 1952), pp. èl9f .... ......... 5 loc. cit. ^Mark 14:10. G. Hebert, Apostle and Bishop (London: Faber and Faber, 1963) , p. 40. ^Acts 6:2; I Corinthians 15:5* 17 I frequently in the earlier New Testamoxt works, especially the Pauline writings. Problems of verification for the student are ever before him. And perhaps the cxily thing that can be affirmed in such matters is that it is as reasonable (if, indeed enough evidence can be brought out) to affirm as it is to deny. Therefore, the affirmation seems reasonable at this point that Jesus did, as a matter of fact, choose twelve from among his followers to carry out œrtain functions. The mission of the twelve.— The question of the mission of the select disciples of Jesus is in some ways an appendage of the issue of the historicity of the grov^. If one could maintain that the nunber I twelve, ^plied to the disciples of Jesus is a retrojecticn on the part| I of the later church to indicate its "eschatological consciousness" i : (Bultmann), then he could equally argue that the whole idea of a mis- I q sion by the twelve, as reported in all the Synoptic Gospels,^ is cmly . indicative of the church’s missionary consciousness. If one takes the skeptical view of the mission, it immediately brings certain problems to the fore. For exanple, if there was no mission, then indeed the "historical relaticmships are made even more obscure.Also, if there was no mission, that is, if the sending out of the disciples did not have its origin in the will of Jesus, what motive would there be for including it in the Synqptic narratives? ^Mark 6:7; Luke 9:2; Matthew 10:5. * H. Rengstorf, " 0 1 1 0 0x0X 00," TCMT, ed. Gerhard Kittel, trans. Geoffrey W. Bromiley (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., 1964), I, 425. 18 Borrikamm^^ considers it reasonable that the historical Jesus would have caused his disciples to share in his authority, and would, there fore, have sent them on a preaching tour. Ani beyond that he thinks that, based t^n their sharing in Jesus* authority, the disciples could very easily have fallen into a dispute over the question of #10 among their ranks would have the greatest authority, as is reported about the sons of Zebedee.^ If the case for the mission of the twelve is stronger because it is included in all three of the Synoptics, the case for the mission of i o the seventy (two) is weak for exactly the opposite reascm. Luke a- lone gives this account, #iich is probably an esgsansion of the mission of the twelve reported by Mark. It is found in the great "Central Sec tion" of Luke’s Gospel, and is suspect, if for no other reason, because it prefaces the travel narrative of Jesus into Samaria, a journey not even hinted at in the other Synoptic Gospels. Most likely Luke sees this missionary tour throv^h eyes that have witnessed the great Gentile missioi which is already a reality during his time. The mission of the cit., p. 149. ^Mark 10i35ff. 13 The variant reading here in Luke 10:1,17, seventy/seventy-two, identical in both verses, is a well known and interesting problem. Bruce I4etzger, "Seventy or Seventy-two Disciples?" NTS, V (1959), 299- 306., has shoin that the evidence for the two readings is so well bal anced that it should appear: seventy (two). In favor of the reading seventy-two, it can be contended that, just as the mission itself is an expansim of the original mission of the twelve, so also is the number sevoity-tWD an intensification of the original number twelve (six times twelve equals sevoity-two). Luke’s tendency to intensify numbers in this way can be seen again in Acts 1:15 where the original twelve have beccme "about a hundred and twenty." 19 seventy (two) seems, then, to be little more than a doublet of the actual mission of the t^mlve. It is erployed, however, hy the author of the third Gospel, to provide a framsworJc for the majority of the material peculiar to that Gospel. Though it is widely held that the mission of the sevaity (two) is a doublet of the original mission of the twelve, there are those v»ho disagree and contend for its historicity. Richard Glover has recently shown that he is anoig this latter group. He is following with con fidence the ancient tradi-tion, reflected in Glanent of Alexandria, that Barnabas was "one of the seventy. " Glover believes this to be reliable information, and further, that Barnabas, having been with Jesus, and thus with the church in its earliest days, provides Luke with W^undant and highly accurate informatics for the third Gospel and Acts. Several things stand or fall together in Glover’s thesis. Ger^ tainly if Barnabas was "one of the seventy," as he believes, then the i seventy was a historical reality; the mission of the seventy too is I likely to have occurred. But in the light of the fact that Glover’s entire argxment rests cn the testimony of a late seocnd century tradi tion, and considering how seccnd century and later traditim often amounted to wild and fantastic assertions about the first century ^^In this section (especially chapter 15) are to be found all of the great Lukan parables. ^^Richard Glover, "’Luke, The Antiochene* and Acts," NTS, KL (1964), 97-106. ^^Stromata, II, xx. 20 apostles and other Christian perscxialities, it seems highly unlikely that it has any real substance. Significance of the number twelve.— (M the surface, it might appear that this section on the irrportance of the nunber twelve should have appeared at the beginning of the chapter. But since its appear ance there would have prejudged the discussions of the historicity of the twelve and their mission, it seemed better to place it here, following the sections where those questions were dealt with. Assuming that Jesus did select a specific mmber of persons for whom to reserve extraordinary responsibility and authority among the larger circle of his followers, why did he settle on tdfô number twelve? "And he appointed twelve, to be with him, and to be sent out to preach and have authority to cast out demons. It is not necessary to search far to find the background of the number twelve within the Bible. It is obviously connected with Israel’s twelve tribes. The iiïportanoe and the task of discipleship is i^mbolically represented by the number of twelve disciples whom Jesus appoints. ... The number twelve symbolises the twelve tribes of Israel. ... Jesus’ disciples were thus conceived as the new pocple of God of the last days. Thus with the choioe of twelve "to be with him, and to be sent out," Jesus gives a visible ^mbol of his call "to the lost sheep of the house of Israel."19 3:14f. l^Bomkaznm, loc. cit. ^^Wfe.tthew 10:6. 21 "Ihat the twelve appointed by Jesus symbolize, for the Synoptic Gospels, the twelve tribes of Israel is further shewn in his rqportedt promise to than that they would come to judge "the twelve tribes of Israel."20 Ihe twelve in Mark.— Mark testifies that Jesus appointed the twelve^^ and, following a period of fellowship with them, he sent them out "two by two" to preach r^entanoe and to cast out demons.22 on their return, 2^ they reported to Jesus caa their es^rienoes and ac- OGG^lishments. Later we find the twelve specifically mentioned in ocmnection with the journey to Jerusalaafi,2^ thm finally at the last 2%^tthew 19:28; Luke 22:30. in this saying Luke does not in- Ielude "twelve" before "thrones." Frank Beare, The Earliest Beoords of : Jesus (New York: Abingdon Press, 1962), p. 195, sugg^fs this is be^ I cause Luke remembers that Judas Iscariot was present. K . H. Rengstorf, {"awôGKo," TEKT, ed. Gerhard Kittel, trans. Geoffrey W. Brcmil^ (Grand Rapids: Wm. Ë. Eerdmans Pub. Co., 1964), II, 327, says that the im portance of this saying, ^>art from the question of auth^ticity, is found in the later experienoe of rejection hy Israel of the twelve. They would come, then, not to rule over Israel, but to share in the judgment of Israel with their Lord who also had bee^i rejected by Israel. ^ ^ M a c k 3 s l4 f . j ^ ^ M a r k 6 *7 ,1 2 . 23 Mark 6:30. It is only here in Mark that the twelve^are call ed owoaToXoi. The use of owooToXoi in association with e^ouata (v.7) strongly suggests the legal, authoritative character of the missicm, and gives si%)port to our contention, si#ca, pp. 8-14, of a close asso ciation between the Jewish shaliah and tbe Christian airoaxoXoa. I 24 Mark 10:32. 22 Stç>per.25 Beyond these instances, with the exception of Peter, James, and Jchn, that bo(% of specifically endowed disciples largely merges into the wider circle usually referred to as "the disciples" or "his disciples." Peter, James, and Jchn are present with Jesus on several important occasions, at the raising of Jairus* daughter,^^ the Trans figuration, 2? and in the garden of Oethsemane.28 % their number Andrew is added on the Mount of Olives# 29 Mark does not, in any explicit way, indicate that Jesus gave to the twelve any aj^intmsnt as a ruling body with enduring powers# The only ocmnission he gives them, as we have noted, 20 was limited to cer tain specific duties# Noticeably absent in Mark is the saying found in the other Synoptic Gospels regarding the disciples* sitting on thrones and judging the twelve tribes of Israel# For Mark, it sœms clear that, aside from Peter, James, and Jdhn, the tsælve are figures of the distant past# Even the list of 22Mark 14:17. ^^Mark 5:37. 9:2. 14:33- 29 Marie 13:3. Stgza, p. 21, n. 23. So limiting the cxamissions to one in Mark, we obviously exclude the one contained in the so-called "lost ending" (16:9-20). For a discussion of this, see Bruce Metzger, Text of the New Testament (New York: Oxford iMiversity Press, 1964) , pp. 23 their names he gives^^ does not ^pear to hold xraich iaportanoe for | I Mark, but is only part of a somewhat bare outline vàiioh is to some ex- | tent filled in by the later Gospels. The twelve in Matthew. — Several things are of special note in Matthew's treatment of tte twelve. For one thing, there is reflected a definite interest in the hierarchical character of the group, es pecially in regard to Peter. 22 ihis need not mean that Matthew is vesting in Peter any more than the dignity of authoritative insight for the settlement of matters of practical conduct, but nevertheless the fact remains that Peter, representative of the twelve, is seen as j more than a wandering preacher of repentance. i Another important thing to be seen in Matthew is the scope of I I the commission of the risen Lord to the disciples which marks the end I -30 ^ of the bodt.'^'^ The earlier charge to go only "to the lost sheep of the I house of Israel" has new became a full-blown worldwide mission charge* ! ; This clearly reflects a time idien the New Testament apostle-oonoept is j closely aligned with the Gentile mission, an alignment that is much I later than Jesus' time, and is prc^>ably inspired by Paul and his work. 2^Mark 3:14ff. ^^Matthew 16:17-19. I 33 I Matthew 28:16ff. Because of the absence of Judas Iscariot, I the ocmmission is giv^ to "the eleven disciples." 24 Aside from these peculiarities in J^tthew's picture of the j twelve, the same g^ieral image is given here as in Mark, Other than ‘ Peter and Judas Iscariot, little interest is shown in the individual . personalities of the disciples. Ihe IWelve in Ihke-Acts.— There is in the third Gospel a no- ! ticeable shift in the portrait of the twelve disciples of Jesus— the ; tendency to idmitify the gror^ as the apostles. That is not to say ' that Luke vould restrict the apostles to the nuiïtoer twelve; perhaps I it would be better to say that in Luke the tsælve are more "apostolic" I thaa in the other Gospels. It is probably this tendency on the part of the Gospel of Luke that begins in a concrete way to set the stage for the later development in the same direction. In si%x)rt of this canclusion is the statistical fact that in Luke the noun ajrooxoXoa appears in reference to the twelve five t i m e s ,24 cof^pared to only onoe each in the other Synoptics.2^ A further peculiarity of Luke is that in his list of the twelve,2® whom he emphasizes "named apostles" by Jesus, we find Judas, the son of James, in the place of Thaddaeus idiose name is in the list as given by both Mark and Matthew. 27 No special point can be made of this, since we know nothing of either of these men. 246:13; 9:10; 17:5; 22:14; 24:10. 22j^tthew 10:2; Mark 6:30. 2%uke 6:13ff. D supports L^±>aeus instead of Thaddaeus at Mark 3:18 and Matthew 10:3. I 25 ! I In summary, there is in Luke the clear sign of an emerging ten dency to identify the twelve and the apostles more closely than is done in Mark. But beyond that, the twelve are for Luke, as they are for Mark, in the past. Neither their deeds nor their personalities are of great irrportanoe; there is even some confusion as to their names. #iat is begun in Luke's Gospel continues in Acts, although Acts presents some difficulties as we try to come to grips with thB question of the twelve and the apostles. Probably in Acts 1-5 the two terms are interchangeable, but beyond that section this is not the case. For instance, Bam^^as and Paul, #30 are by no means among the twelve, are designated apostles. 28 Also, at the conference in Acts 15, #iere Paul and Barnabas canm to mœt with "the apostles and elders," it is inpossible to know certainly who are include in the former group, though there is no reason to think that more than the twelve is meant. Gne of the most glaring questions raised by a study of Acts is this: Just where among the apostles does Luke place Paul and Barna bas? Is it possible that «1160x0X00, as it allies to these two, does not carry the same meaning as in the case of the twelve? This seems to be a strong possibility. At no time in Acts does Paul or Barnabas assisne a role that would indicate they held a place of authority. The places in vbich they are referred to as apostles are always contexts in Wiich they are sent by the Antioch church aci specific errands. In 2%cts 14:4, 14. 26 chapter 11, they are sent with money to Jerusalem to aid during the famine which Agabus reported.29 After their return,^® they are seit by the church on a missionary tour. The point is that Paul and Bar nabas appear in Acts to be apostles in the restricted sense of shaliah— "congregational apostles,"42 Wiose duties are defined by specific instructions. Even the preaching of Paul, #iich covers a large portion of Acts, comes under the scrutiny of Jerusalem (the tx^lve?).42 dbservatd.cms make especially tempting the conclu sion that the wri-ber of Acts has no intention of leaving the ir^ress- ion that Paul and Barnabas, though "set apart" by the Holy Spirit, and even scnfâ-times called apostles, are ^DOStJLes in the same s^ise as were the original twelve. He quickly shcws44 that the vacancy in the twelve left by Judas was filled by one appointed by the risen Lord. And these twelve men, for the writer of Acts, take on an image of fixed importance that runs through the entire bode, though it must be 2^Acts 11:27-30. 4®Acrts 12:25. ^^Acts 13;2ff. 42 See the discussion of this swra, p. H . ^^Acts 15; 21:17ff. ^^Acts 1:15-26* For a discussion of the significance of the ap pointment of Matthias, see K. H. Rengstorf, "The Election of mtthias," in Current Issues in Mew Testament interpre-tation: Essays in Honor of Otto A. piper , eci. William Klass^ end Graydon F. Snyder (New Yo^; Harper and Brothers, 1962), pp. 178-192, whose basic thesis is that the reconstitution of the original twelve was a visible sign that God had not given up his claim on Israel. He says that "it proves God's un shakable "Yes" to his call of Israel as the people vho belong to Jesus, its Messiah." p. 191 27 noted that in Acts as in the Gospels cnly a few of the personalities play any part in the story. The fixed character of the twelve.— When we ocKpile the evidence supplied by the Acts and the Pauline epistles, we readily see the m- possibility of equating the twelve and the apostles because of a rather fluid use of the term airootoXoa* But regardless hew much the church eaq>anded, regardless how numerous the apostles became, the twelve retained a fixed place in the church's mind. Their status had been conferred on them by Jesus himself. It could thus never be shar ed, and' certainly could never be modified or taken away. Wien the %jocalypse was written late in the first century, car early in the second, still remembered is the special place of prorainenoe Jesus had given his chosen disciples. And #ien the seer sees the New Jerusalem, their place is described in lofty words. It had a great, high wall, with twelve gates, and at the gates twelve angels, and on the gates the names of the twelve -tribes of the sons of Israel were inscribed; on the east three gates, on the north three gates, cm the south three gates, and on the west three gates. And the wall of the city had t^lve foundations, and on them the names of the twelve apostles of the lamb. 45 Certainly this passage indicates how permanent a place the twelve occupied in the early church. Even Paul, though refusing to be œunt- ed beneath the twelve in the matter of apostleship, nevertheless did not claim to be one of them. Nor did anycsne else. 45pevelation 21:12-14. Rengstorf, "6wôe»ca,” p. 328, says this passage is the positive side of Wiat is stated in a negative way in Matthew 19:28. See supra, p. 21, n. 20. The Acts shows the quick steps that were taken to replace one of the twelve Wio had committed treason, an act of apostacy Wiich created a vacancy. But in chapter 12, vten one of the twelve was put to death by Herod, no atteint was made to r^lace him. The implication of this is that, vtereas apostacy brought a vacancy in the body of the twelve, death did not. "Any member of the groip #30 died before the return of Christ in glory would be raised from the dead at the great day to in- t^it his inalienable share in the promise."4^ w. Manscn, The^Ghurch* s Ministry (London: Hodder & Stoughton Ltd., 1948), p. 3Ï. ' CHAPTER IV THE APOSTEES The purpose of this section is to examine the ways in which New Testament writes use the word air 60x0X00. But first it will serve well to see the frequmcy of occurrence of the word in various bodies of New Testament literature* Appearances of «^60x0X00 in the New Testament.— There are seventy-nine well supported uses of &Tro 0xoXo0 in the New Testament. It is important to notice that four-fifths of the appearances are to be found in Luke-Acts and Paul's writings, a fact vhich bears heavily on determning the neaning of the word for other New Testament writers. We find &ir 00xoXo0 once each in Matthew,^ Mark, and John,2 six tiroes in %3atthew 10:2. One witness (Sy®) reads tiaônxwv here. 2jdhn 13:16* Here air 00x0X00 is used fully in the sense of shaliah. Notice the juxtaposition of ôoOXoo/»c6pio0 and airooxoXoa/ iT%ÿa0. So K. H. Rengstorf, ”0^60x0X00," TCOT, ed* Gerhard Kittel, trans. Geoffrey W. Brcmiley (Grand Rapids : V&i. B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., 1964), I, 421. 29 30 Luke,2 twenty-eight in Acts,^ all in the first sixteen chapters, and twenty-nine times in Paul (this includes four in Ephesians and one in Colossians) • Beyond this we find the word five times in the Pastorals, once each in Hebrews, I Peter, and Jude, twice in II Peter, and three times in Revelation. The meaning of dirSotoXog in the Hew Testament.— There are no doubt in the New Testan^it many subtle possibilities of meaning of the word airouToXoa. But broadly speaking, we are met with two basic mean ings: (1) Messenger. This is the point at vhich the word in the New Testament has its closest contact with its Jewish counterpart— shaliah. 2 The type of messenger is determined by the context. (2) The bearers of the messie of Christ, or the missionaries sent out by Christ.^ The essential difference between the usages is that the latter is specifically religious in content. It is connected to the commission that inheres in the encounter with the risen Lord. The for mer, on the other hand, is not necessarily in reference to religious messengers. Iftifortunately, it is not always possible to isolate these two meanings one from the other, and the first is far less frequent the five listed supra, p. 24, n. 34, add the appearance in Luke 11:49 \diich does not appy bo the twelve. In addition to these six, àirooToXoo is supported at 9:1 by several witnesses. ^Though D and others also shew oTrocrToXou 0 instead of avépwwouo at Acts 5:34. ^See sig>ra, pp. 8-14. %i%x)rting this differentiation are Johannes Munck, "Paul, The Apostles, and The Twelve," STh, III (1949), 103, and Rengstorf, loc. cit. 31 than the second. But for the sake of further clarification, we will look at some cases where it is clear that one or the other of these suggested basic meanings is meant. most devious instance of «1 x 00x0X00 is the sense of messen ger, official representative appointed to a specific task, beyond which task &Tr 60xoXo0 in referaioe to the person spoken of loses its meaning, is found in II Corinthians 8:23. Ihe context is Paul's discussion of j the collection for the Judean churches and the "brethren" #iom Paul is sliding to make that collection. These unidentified "brethren" are referred to hy Paul as «irooxoXot etcicXnoiwv. Another such case is that of Epaphroditus vdio in Philiipians 2:25 is called by Paul "your messen ger (3nr 60x0X00] and minister to ny needs." Suggested here is that Ep^ihroditus* ^jostleship is detmsnin^ by his fulfilling a specific task with reference to Paul's needs. Attention has already been called to the occurrence in the Gospel of John^ of the word «1 x 60x0X00 in this restricted sense vdiich is lacking in any specifically religious con tent. Also we have speculated® about the use of «1 x 60x0X00 with refer- eace to Paul and Barnabas in the Acts, lAether it perh^)s means nothing more than "oongregatianal jostles," or "apostles of the churches." There is in this narrower usage of «1 x 60x0X00 little or no hint of in itiative on the part of the «1 x 60x0X00. He does Wiat he is instructed ^Supra, p. 29, n. 2. ®Si#ra, pp. 25f. 32 to do, and when that is done he returns to whomever sait him; and out side the framework of his being engagé in doing a ^jecifically ap pointed task, he is not necessarily worthy of the title liroaToXov. Standing somewhat on the fringe of the forgoing definition of aiFooToXoo as "mesi^nger" are the two occurrences of the wcxrd in the first two Gospels.^ In both cases the twelve are called airoatoXoi in a context y / h e o c e . they have been sent with specific instructions.^^ When they ooaplete their assignment th^ return. We have been discussing the use in the New Ttestament of the word àf60x0X00 in the narrower sense, cicely related to the Hebrew shaliah— official r^res^tative, messenger. But we have sr^gested two basic meanings of the word found in the New Testament, the second being the missionaries sent out by Christ. No doubt it is this latter cate gory that Paul has in mind Wien he speaks of Christ's having appeared "to all the apostles."^ We know that, at least for Paul, this en counter constituted a mission charge with specifically religious, more specifically eschatological implications. Paul's self-designation as an apostle grows out of this encounter. "Last of all, ... he appear- ®Matthew 10:2; Mark 6:30. ^^See particularly the detailed instructions in Matthew 10:5-42. Nothing seans to be left to the imagination of the "apostles." See an other referaioe to this sane passage, supra, p. 10. 4ùi Mark it is with direct reference to the return from a special commission that the word «1 x 60x0X00 appears. Corinthians 15:7. 33 ed also to me. For I am the least of the apostles, unfit to be called an ^x>stle, because I persecuted the church of God."^® We find IwoaToXoa in the saise of the missionaries sent out by Christ more in Paul's writings than in any other New Testament source, though Bultmann's statement that "Paul calls all missionaries *a- p o s t l e s ' " ^ 4 i s an exaggeration. Vfe do not find either Timothy, Apollos, or Silvanus ever specifically called apostles. It must be ad- mitt^, however, that it can be argued from inference that Paul does refer to all three of these men as apostles in different passages. For instance, Timoti^ and Silvanus are mentioned in the salutation of I Thessalonians, and are probably included in "we," "us," "our," throughout the entire letter. And thus it could be held that they are included in the reference to "apostles of Christ. In the case of i^llos, it can also be inferred that Paul refers to him as an apostle. He is prominent, along with Peter, in I Corinthians 1-4. Especially in 4;6 he is mentioned in an extracnrdinary way, Wiich mention is the immediate context of Paul's statement: "I think that God has esdiibited us apostles as last of all, like men sentenced to death.But all of these cases are entirely inferential, rmdering unnecessary Bultmann's ^^I Corinthians 15:8,9. 14 Rudolf Bultmann, Theology of the New Testam^t, trans. Ken drick Grobel (New York: Charles Scribner^s Sons, l!^^l-l955), I, 60. 15 I Tbessalonians 2:6. ^®I Corinthians 4:9. 34 sweeping generalizatim. Timothy, %)ollos, and Silvanus are certainly missionaries, but are not necessarily called apostles. One clear instance of missionaries being called apostles is that of Andronicus and Junias.l^ The language describing them, that they are "of note anoig the apostles," is somewhat ambiguous. Were Andro- - nicus and Junias well known by the apostles? Or were they, as apostles themselves , distinguished among that group? Sanday and Headlam^® take the latter view. They consider that eirianiioa, literally "stamped," gives strength to this view. Also they speculate about the interesting I possibility that Junias may have been a woman. A. G. Hebert^® raises 'the question as to Whether Andronicus and Junias were perh^s the founcfers of the church at Rome. I The apostles in Acts; the question of "The College of the s Twelve Jostles."— At the beginning of this chapter, it was stated 'that since «1 x 00x0X00 appears in the writings of Paul and Luke more than in the other bodies of New Testament literature, its use by these two I is inportant to our understanding of its meaning for other writers. |The thesis held in this paper is that Paul is central to the develqp- I ment of the idea of "The Twelve Apostles." Because of Paul's great inportance, an aitire chapter will be devoted to his writings in this I ^^Fcmans 16:7. I 1 f t William Sanday and Arthur C. Headlam, The Epistle of Paul to tW Romans: A Critical and Exegetical Commentary (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, imSiT w- 442£.------^ -------------- I 19 Apostle and Bishop (Londcxn: Faber and Faber, 1963), p. 41. 35 regard. But at this point, it is well to notice an iirportant peculiar ity in the Lukan picture of "the twelve," especially in the Acts. In Acts, apart from 14:4, 14, it does not seem too hazardous to assert that the word ^1 x 00x0X00 always refers to "the twelve," or to "the eleven" between the time of Judas* departure and the replacement of Judas by Matthias. The "eleven" of Luke 24*33 are "the eleven apostles" to Wiose number Matthias is added. When the original group of apostles is reconstituted with the ^pointment of Matthias, there emerges in Acts an image of this group #iich closely approximates that of a collie, or as Bauer would have 21 it, a "governing board." This assertion has not always in modern criticism met with approval,but a view of some of the evidence for it will show that it is justified. Tie twelve ^sostl^ naturally as sume the oversight of the young church following the Ascension, ac- ^®Acts 1:26. D reads 1$ here, ^duL<±t reading is preferred by R. V. G. Tasker, Tie Greek New Testammt (London: Oxford university and Cambridge university Presses, 19^4) , p. 429, believing that evôetca "may have been the 'correction* of a somesdiat pedantic editor." ^^alter Bauer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament^ and Other E^ly Christian literature, trans. William F. Arndt and F. wilbur Gingrich (Chicago: Tl:m ubiv^csity of Chicago Press, 1957), p. 99. 22 For exanple, B. H. Streeter, The Primitive Church (New York: Tie Macmillan Co., 1929), p. 42. But his objection seems to be direct ed more at an anachronism: "to understand the history of early Chris tianity must begin by eliminating from our minds the traditional picture of the iWelve i^stles sitting at Jerusalem, like a College of Cardinals, systematising doctrine, and superintending the organisation, of the Primitive Church." 36 cording to the Acts narrative. It is they change the name of 23 Jos^h to Barnabas. It is at the feet of the apostles that the pro ceeds of the sale of property for distribution among the needy are 24 laid. When after the death of Stqphen the other disciples "were all scattered throughout the region of Judea and Samaria,** the apostles remain in Jerusalem.^ Yet Wiile remaining in Jerusalem they oversee the evangelistic work of those Wio are "scattered."^® #e notice also that the newly converted Saul is brought to Jerusadem by Barnabas, im plying the need for the jostles' ^aproval of Saul.^^ Then at the council in Acts 15, the position of the apostles, along with the elders, is prominent in the settlenoit of the disputation over the cir- 28 cumcision issue. Strongly suggested by all this is that, at least for the writer of Acts, the twelve apostles who stayed in Jerusalam and whc®e activities were centered there, held powerful and authoritative sway over all the churches, both Jewish and Gentile. In summary, we have the word «TroaToXoa applied in various ways and to a broad range of persons in the New Testament. Vfe find it in references to penaans Wio are but messengers sent to perform specific ^®Acts 4:36. ■^^Acts 4:35, 37? 5:2. 8:1 ^®Acts 8:14. 27 Acts 9:27. ^®Acts 15:6, 22, 23. 37 J tasks within the church. Those idio are missionary evangelists are also called apostles. And then in a way that does not seem to fit well in either of these categories, we notice the original twelve select dis ciples of Jesus referred to as ^sostles. These apostles, and this is especially true in the Acts, begin to take an. an ag%>earanoe that is a cut above the other leaders in the churdh. It is here, in Acts, that ^ begin to see the tendency to solidify a view of the twelve apostles as a uniquely endowed grou%) of persons who were appointed to sv^rin- tend the affairs of the growing churdh. % suggest that the twelve apostles appear in Acts in a way that can with good reason be described I as "The College of the IWelve Apostles."^® Admittedly, the Acts was written late in the first century. And prior to its appearance, there stand the life and works of Paul, the one Wiose works and especially vdiose description of himself as an 'apostle, and the content and meaning he gave to that office, strongly influŒiœd not only Acts, but the other New Testament writings as well in the matter of apostleship. Our stu% will new turn to the writings of Paul in an attaipt to shew some of the ways in vdiich idiis happaied. ^®It is true that the writer of Acts does not use the term "the twelve apostles" frequently. But there is no reason to suppose that he means other than the reocaistituted twelve ^dien he speaks of the jostles, except, of course, \dien the context demands it, e.g. 14:4,14. CHAPTER V THE PLACE OF PAUL There is in the New Testament a movement from a view of the earliest followers of Jesus as oi 6w6c)ca vioenxai, which, in itself is not a very pregnant ejqiressim, to a tremendously heightened and dra matic refer^ce to the same grou^ as "ot 6w6eKa airoaxoXoi xoG apviou.'*^ It has been the purpose of the first part of this paper to s^iarate "the twelve" from "the ^lostles" and to show that the earlier picture does not have them identified. From this point, the stu% will turn toj an attempt to show that the later New Testament writings and other ear-; ly Christian writings do tend to identify the two groups, as is clearly! indicated in the above mentioned passage from the Apocalypse. The prcblem is; how did this transformation take place? Who, if anyone, was instrumental in the obvious change that took place? Our contention is that it was Paul— his ministry, his own apostolic self-oonscious- ness— vdio provides the key to the development. Certainly airovxoXou was ^Revelation 21:14. 38 39 used ty Christians before the time of Paul, but its meaning was no doubt vague and closely akin to its Jewish ancestor, shaliah. After the Pauline era, however, such is not the case. Paul tecâmicalizes the term. He does indeW baptize it into Christ. The later church, then, ^prcpriates Paul's understanding of what it læans to be an apostle. Secondary literature abounds in suçîport of this proposition. It is through Paul that we are acquainted with the early Christian idea of the apostle. Most of what is said in the field of research concerning the twelve ^XDstles and the ^xostolate is taken from Paul's epistles. Much therefore (Spends on the interpretation given these texts.^ Paul should be given much of the credit for the H.T. con- I o^t of apostleship. The Greek terms were obscure until I Paul used them in his letters. ... Since the term is ' most prevalent in the writings of Paul and luke, and both I were of the gentile mission, and since most of Paul's I uses of the word come in the actions of those epistles ' tdiich deal with the controvert' with the Judaisers, it seems almost certain that the term apostolos was cata pulted into prominence in this controversy. Paul was not the first to bear this Cà?sek title, but his writings are the first to give the title prcmlnenoe in Christian litera ture. 2 Paul and the twelve. — #iat Paul knea of the original twelve I disciples is inpossible to know from his writings. Of the twelve he mentions only Peter and John.4 m all of Paul's letters we never find ^Johannes Munck, "Paul, the apostles, and the Twelve," STh, III (1949), 96. Î ®Nbr and Expositor, LV, No. 4 (1958), 400. ^Morris Ashcraft, "Paul's understanding of Apostleship," Review A ^Galati^s 2:9. James is also mentioned in this verse, but whether he is the Lord's brother or the brother of Jdhn is not known. 40 I employed the expression ox 6w6sK« «1 x 00x0X01 • As a matter of fact, 6w6eK« is found but cnoe,^ and in the context there is an obvious se- , I paration of <SwôeK« and air 60x0X01. Paul does speak of having gone to Jerusalem to visit "those who were apostles before me."® But his first visit was not until three years after his "call."^ The second trip he made to Jerusalem, #iich was largely for the purpose of defend ing himself against false claims made against him, was not until four teen years after the first. ® By the very fact that Paul made these journeys, there is indicated that the Jerusalem apostles held for him a place of authority. Though, to be sure, he never was willing to cai- cede to them a place in the mattmr of the apostolic office that was more important than liis own. In fact, seme of his references to the earlier apostles— those at Jerusaleifr—are strongly sarcastic. I wait UÇ) by revelation; and I laid before them (but pri vately before those who w^ce of r^ute) the gospel which I preach among the Gentiles, lest somehow I should be running or had run in vain. ... And from those %ho were routed to be something (%diat they were makes no difference to me; God shows no partiality)— those, I say, who were of repute added nothing to me. 9 I think that I am not in the least inferior to these super lative ^)ostles.^® % Corinthians 15:5. ^Galatians 1:17. 7 Galatians 1:18. ®Galatians 2:Iff. ^Galatians 2:2,6. Corinthians 11:5. 41 The pre-Pauline view of the office of an ^>ostle.— Because we find in Paul's writings both of the basic New Testament meanings of oLTfoaxoXoa, it is reasonable to assume that both were in use before he himself was "called" to the office. Paul uses «1 x 00x0X00 in the sense of shaliah, that is "messŒiger," a concept common to Jewish and to early Christian usage* Also he eaiploys «1 x 00x0X00 in refer^ces to the missionary evangelists.^ And it should not be doubted that he uses it with reference to the t w e l v e , ^2 though it remains unclear exactly how he regarded than. How is it that we call this section "the pre-Pauline view," yet our sources are all Pauline? Well, it is almost universally agreed ! that the Pauline corpus is the earliest of all the Christian writings. ‘ Paul's works do, therefore, reflect concepts and attitudes that were I held before his ocmversion, among which is the concept of the i «1 X 00X0X00. Paul assumes the usage of the word as it was used various- , ' ly in the church; and we find him using it variously, just as were 1 I other Christians. Thus we feel justified in referring to a pre-Pmiline view evai though we use Paul's writings to give its outlines. The Pauline view of the office of an apostle. — Regardless how Paul understood «1 x 60x0X00 as it applied to anybody else, his view of himself as an apostle is unique. In his mind there is a pre-eminence ^^11 Corinthians 8:23; Philippians 2:25. ^Bcmans 16:7. ^^Galatians 1, 2. 42 i I to his apostolic calling. His call, his gifts, his duties, are in no way determined, nor can they be properly evaluated, by man, not even his fellow-^jostles. The point of reference for Paul's call to be an apostle is God himself. For I would have you know, brethren, that the gospel Wiich was preached by me is not man's gospel. For I did not receive it from man, nor was I taught it, but it came through a revelaticm of Jesus Christ. ... But Wien he Wio had set me apart before I was bom, and had called me through his grace, was pleased to reveal his Son to me, in order that I might preach him amcrsg the Gentiles, I did not confer with flesh and blood, nor did I go up to Jerusalem to those Wio were apostles before m e . ^4 Noteworthy in this passage is the l^iguage that is so raninisoent of some of the prc^hets of the Old Testament. One is ramnded of the words of Amos to the priest Amaziah who urged Amos to leave Bethel and go to JUdah and there pcogbesy^ Amos expresses his solidarity, not with the feelings of men regarding his prqghetic role, but with the will of God #30 had called him from his task as a herdsman to come and speak to Israel.^ And one might well wond^ to what extent Jeremiah's descripticxi of his summons to the prophetic office^® was in Paul's mind when he speaks of being "set c^>art before I Wcis bom, ... in order that I might preach him among the Gentiles." It surely is no mere ^^Galatians 1:11-12, 15-17b. ^Amos 10:10-15. Jeremiah 1:5. "Before I formed you in the worb X knew you, and before you were bom I consecrated you; I ^jpointed you a prcphet to the naticxis." : " ; ooincidenœ that these similarities exist betw^n Paul's self-descrip- I ticai and that of Israel's great pro^iets. Notice another passage in \diich Paul denies any reliance ugcan the judgment of his peers an his fulfillmait of the systolic office. Moreover it is required of stewards that they be found trustworthy. But with me it is a very small thing that I should be judged by you or by any human court. I do not even judge ityself. I am not aware of anything against ityself, but I am not ther^y acquitted. It is the lord vho judges me.i^ Paul is "a called apostle. "2-8 And his call ccmes from God through the revelation to him of his Son, Jesus Christ. Out of the framework of Paul ' s consciousness of being ^pointed to the apostolic office evolve two self-designations found frequently in his writings— "an apostle to I the Gentiles," and "an apostle of Jesus Christ." An jostle to the Gentiles "There are no apostles to the G^tiles, but only ana 'apostle of the Gentiles.*”^® But on some points I have written to you very boldly I by way of reminder, because of the grace given me fcy God to be a minister of Christ Jesus to the Gentiles ! in the priestly service of the gospel of God, so that j the offering of the Gentiles may be acceptable, I sanctified by the Holy Spirit. 21 ^^I Corinthians 4:2-4. ^^aul's use of (cXntoa in some of his salutations is important in pointing out the way he understood himself as an apostle. Indeed the Ehglish "called to be an apostle" (e.g. Romans 1:1) does not ag^ proach Wiat Paul intended. ^%ee Romans 11:13 for a place Wiere this self-designation is sp^ifically used by Paul. Î o£. cit., p. 97. ^■Stemans 15:15-16. 44 The entire section of Romans 9-11 also strongly unc^rsoores Paul's understanding of the iraportanoe of his offiœ in terms of the mission to the Gentiles. He believes that the time will come Wien, after "the full number of the Gentiles come in,"22 Israel will turn from its re jection of Jesus Christ. Paul is thus dedicated to bringing in this "full number." This is what he is specifically called to do. An interesting point just here is that, Wiile seeing his assign ment as the c^Dstle to the non-Jewish world, Paul can speak of Peter as being assigned to preach to the J^tfs. "For he Wio worked through Peter for the mission to the circumcised worked through me also for the Gentiles. "22 %t is almost as if Paul sees the entire world divided i into two parts, one given to Peter and the other to himself. One might say that in this sense, for Paul, there really are only two apostles— one to JavB, one to Gentiles. I An apostle of Jesus Christ. 24_"g^ name of apostle does not confer an absolute positicm, but it merely determines his relationship ; to the one vho assigned him his commission. "2® Therefore, that Paul I was an jostle was not in itself important; it was that he was "an i apostle of Jesus Christ" that gave the importance to the office. This i ^^Konans 11:25b. ^^Galatians 2:8. 1 24 I This title is to be found especially in the salutations of I Paul's letters. See particularly I and II Corinthians. 25- Hermann Vogelstein, "The Development of the %x)Stolate in Judaism and its Transformation in Christianity," HUCA, II (1925), 119. 45 ! j ^If-designatican expresses Paul's feeling of solidaril^ with the person I ' i I and will of the risen Lord, and further adds to the description of his I work. The risen Lord had appeared to Paul just as to "all the apostles. "2® This ag^oaranoe, this revelation, had signified a caa- missicm to bear personal testimony to the Gentiles that the Christ, the head of the church, was alive and at work in the world. It is no doubt this feeling of solidarity with the risen Lord Tshich provided for Paul his tremendous sense of urgency. This feeling of personal rela tionship coupled with Paul's notion of Israel's coming into the church vhen the proper number of Gentiles had done so are prcÆ>ably the factors that motivated Paul to travel all over the Mediteranean world preaching to all vdio would listen. The post-Pauline view of the office of an ^iostle.— Wiai Paul has spokm over and over again in his writings with respect to his i i understanding of the significance of being an apostle, he has added a n&a significance to the idea, and one which comes to triumph over all I others. No logger does «1 x 00x0X00 mean simply an errand-boy t%>e mes senger or evQi an evangelistic missionary. Now «1 x 60x0X00 means one who jhas been called by Christ, endowed with special gifts, commissioned to I spread the go^iel throughout the world. This transformation, or per haps technicalization, is due to Paul's own use of dir 60x0X00 as it |appli^ to him and his work. 2®i Corinthians 15:7b. 46 All the apostles are missionaries, specially ocmmissiŒied by tte risen lord himself. "And you shall be ity witnesses in Jerusalan and in all Judea and Saomria and to the end of the earth. And in an even later docianent we read this; "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing tham in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit."^® The picture of the apostles as wander ing preachers in the maimer of Paul is also carried over into the second century. A marvelous example of this is found in Justin. For from Jerusalem there went out into the world, men, twelve in number, and these illiterate, of no ability I in speaking: but by the power of God they proclaimed I to every race of nen that they were sent by Christ to I teach to all the word of God.^^ I Another: interesting passage in this regard is found in Hermas.^^ The Shepherd is asked by Hermas to explain the significance of the twelve I mountains WuLch in appearance were "different from one another and jvarious." The Sh^herd explains that th^ represent the twelve tribes or nations of the earth to whom the Son of God had been preached by the jostles. He does not say there were twelve apostles vho did the preaching, but this is certainly implied in the number of nations of the earth to vhom they preached. I - . . . . ' _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ' - _ _ 2^Acts 1:8. That this OŒimission is given to "the apostles" is clear from 1: 2. I j ^^Matthew 28:19. Theiæ words are spoken to "the eleven disciples" (28:16) , but it is the same group of twelve jostles ( 10: 2), minus Judas. \ ' ^&irst Apology^ XXXIX. 1 ^%imilitude IX, XVII. I 47 In the book of Ephesians we read of the apostles as the founda tion of the Gentile church. It is the apostles to Wiom God has revealed the "nystery of Christ. The office of apostle was the first gift given to men by Christ for the building of the church. Furthermore, Paul’s reference to himself as "an apostle of Jesus Christ" has been taken over by later writers and used as Paul used it in the salutations of their letters. From Paul’s literary intercourse with the churches there no doubt evolved the conclusion in the minds of the early Christians that the apostolic office was one of great autiiority among the followers of Christ. The jostles %ere likely conceived as the final point of re ference in doctrinal matters as well as the administrators of benevo- : lent affairs among the churches. This is clearly the picture of the ; apostles in Acts. And so far as the apostles’ being the authoritative teachers in the church, this view is certainly chanpioned by the long er title of the s^xmd century Didache^"The lord’s Teaching to the I Heathen by the Twelve Apostles." As is reflected especially in the Sync^tic Gospels, the term "the twelve" beocroes a technical term. It is also found in Acts, and once in Paul. But following the life and works of Paul the previously ^i-Ephesians 2:20* I ^%phesians 3:4,5. ^^Ephesians 4:11. I ^%phesians 1:1; Colossians 1:1; I Timothy 1:1; II Timothy 1:1; Titus 1:1; I Peter 1:1; II Peter 1:1. , I 48 I non-technical word &nooToXoG also becomes a technical Christian word. Then, as the development in the thought and life of the church con tinues into the last decades of the first century, the two terms tend to come together in the minds of Christians and we begin to see traces j of identification of "the twelve" and "the apostles." The best ex- anple of this is to be found in Bevelation 21:14. It is our contenticm that behind all this later develc^xnent stands Paul’s view of the ^ostolic office. From an earlier period \«ten the names of offices and designations yfsre not very technical, as is reflected in I Corin thians 15:5-8, a time vhen terms like "the twelve," "the qpostles," i and "all the apostles," could be used loosely, we see later a solidi- i * fication of these terms. For seme, "the twelve" were "the apostles." It would be naive indeed to content that late first century ! Christians thought there were only twelve ^xDstles. But Wiat did I i happen was that as time passed, and the personalities of the original I i and later apostles moved more and more into the distant past, there grew a tendency to identify the apostolic office in the earlier church I with the original twelve whom Jesus chose. This was done notwithstand- ; ing the fact that most of what was written about Wiat an ^xjstle is like or what he does was written by Paul. Paul’s information about ; himself and his apostolic self-understanding was projected back onto I the original twelve. This study evened with the asscartion that "vhen the average man : hears the expression ’the apostles’ his mind automatically centers on 49 the number twelve. It is agreed that if shown the evidence to the contrary, he might never again make this naive mistake. But a surface, uncritical reading of the New Testament will not necessarily cause him i to chcuige his mind, because the tendency to make this identification is already present in the New Testament. It has bœn the purpose of this p^er to shew this is true and some of the mechanics that were in volved in the process. p. 1. 50 BIBLIOGRAPHY BOCKS i Ante-Nioene Fathers. Edited by James Donaldson and Alexander Roberts, îfevised and chronologically arraiged, with brief prefaces and notes by A. Cleveland Oc«e. Grand R^ids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., 1956. 10 vols. Apostolic Fathers. Translated with an introducticm and notes by Kirsopp Lake; (The Loeb Classical Library) London: William Heinanann, Ltd., 1912. 2 vols. Barr, James. Ihe Semantics of Biblical Language. Londcn: Oxford IMiversity Press, 19&1. Bauer, Walter. A Greek-Bnglish Lexicon of the New %stament and Other Early Christian Lib^ature. trans. william kmdt and I F. Wilbur dingrich. Chicago: Dhiversity of Chicago Press, I 1957. Beare, Frank W. The Earliest Records of Jesus. New York: Abingdon I Press, 196%} Borrikarrin, Gunther. Jesus of Nazareth, trans. Irene and Fraser McLusky with James M. Robinson. New lirork: Harper & Brothers, 1960. I |Bultmann, Rudolf. Theology ef the New Testament, trans. Kendrick ; Grcbel. New York: Charles Scribner^s Sons, 1951-1955. 2 vols. Foakes Jackson, F. J. and Lake, Kirsopp (ed.) The Beginnings of Christianity. London: Macmillan and Co., 1920-19^3. S’ vols. I Ivon Hamack, Adolf. Mission and Expansion of Christianity in the 1 First Three Caihuries. trans. James Moffatt. M ed. revised. New Yo^: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1908. 2 vols. jHebert, A. G. %)Ostle and Bishop. London: Faber and Faber, 1963. Herodotus. Translated with an introduction and notes hy A. D. Godley. (The Loeb Classical Library) 2d ed. revised. London: William Heinemann Ltd., 1926. 2 vols. Kirk, Kenneth E. (ed. ) TW Apostolic Ministry: Essays on the History and tlie iXxjtrine of Eplsoojpacy. London: hodder & Stoughton Ltd., 1946. Klein, Gunther. Die zwSlf Apostel. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, 1961. 51 Knox, John. The Early Church and The Coming Great Church. New York; Abingdon Press, 1955. Lightfoot, J. B. Saint Paul’s Epistle to Ihe Galatians. Lcndon: Macmillan and Co., 189Û. Mansm, Thomas Walter. The Church’s Ministry. London? Hodder and Stoughtcxi, Ltd., 1948. Metzger, Bruoe M. The Te^ of the New Testament. New York: Oxford Ihiversity Press, 1964. Mmck, Johannes. Paul and The Salvation of Mankind, trans. Frank Clark. Lcndon: stk Press, Ltd., 19^9. Sanday, William, and Headlam, Arthur C. The l^istle to The Romans; A gi^cal and Exegetieal Commentaryl Edinburgh: Ï & T dark, Streeter, Burnett Hillman. The Primitive Church. New York: The Macmillan Co., 1929. Tasker, R. V. G. The Greek New Testament. London: Oxford thiversity and Cambridge University Presses, 1964. jTaylor, Vincent. The Gospel Acoording to St. Mark. Lcmdon: Macmillan and Co., 195%% I I Williams, C. S. C. A coamentary on the Acts of the Apostles. New ' York: Harper and Brothers, i95^. 52 Articles and P^iodicals Ashcraft, Morris. "Paul' s understanding of Apostleship," Review and Expositor, LV (1958), 400-412. Beare, Frank W. "The Ministry in The Testament Church: Practice and Theory," Anglican Theological Review, XXXVII (1955), 3-18. vua Canpenhausen, Hans Freiherr. "Der urdhristliche i^stelbegriff," Studia Theologica, I (1947) , 96-130. Gavin, Frank. “Shaliach and Apostolos," Anglican Theological Review, IX (1927), 250-259. Glover, Richard. "Luke ’ The Antiochene’ and Acts," New Testament Studies, XI (1964), 97-106. îfetzger, Bruce M. "Sev^ty or Seventy-two Disciples?" New Testament Studies, V (1959), 299-306. Mosbech, Holger. “Apostolos in the New Testament," Studia Theologica, II (1948), 250-259. Munck, Johannes. "Paul, The Apostles, and The Twelve," Studia Theo logica, III (1949), 96-110. Rengstorf, K. H. "aTroaxoXoa," Tieological Dictionary of T^ New Tes^- ment, ed. Gerhard Kittel, trans. beoffrey W. Brcmiley.' Grand Rapids: #n. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1964. I, 407-445. ________. "ôwôetca," TENT, 1964, II, 321-328. . "The Election of Matthias," in Current Issues in New Testa ment Inte^retation: Es^ys in Honor of Otto A. Piper, ed. William Kl^sen and Graydon F. Snyder. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1962. I Shepherd, M. H., Jr. "%ostle," in^rpreter’s Dictionay of The Bible, ed. George A. Butteriok. N ^ York: Abingdon Press, I, 170-172. jvogelstein, Hermann. "The Develognent of the Apostolats in Judaism and its Transformation in Christianity," Hebrew Union College Annual, II (1925), 99-123.

Asset Metadata

Creator Townsend, Dale Jay (author)

Core Title The apostles and the Twelve: A study of the apostle-concept in the New Testament

Contributor Digitized by ProQuest (provenance)

Degree Master of Arts

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag OAI-PMH Harvest,philosophy, religion and theology

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c39-372269

Unique identifier UC11313914

Identifier EP65307.pdf (filename),usctheses-c39-372269 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier EP65307.pdf

Dmrecord 372269

Document Type Thesis

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Townsend, Dale Jay

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the au...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA