Volume IV

The Apostles of Our Lord

Vol. IV, pp. xxvi–xxvii

When our LORD entered upon His ministry He was followed by great multitudes of people from Galilee and from Decapolis, and from Judea, and from beyond Jordan. He now proceeded to provide for His Church the teachers who were to edify His people, and He commenced to proclaim His doctrines by the celebrated Sermon on the Mount. The Twelve Apostles whom He selected were needed to bear witness to His own deeds and words (Matt. iv. 17-25; x. 2-4; Mark iii. 1, 13-19; Luke vi. 12-49). He ordained them “that they should be with Him, and that He might send them forth to preach, and to have power to heal sicknesses and to cast out devils.” After His Ascension it became a chief part of their mission to bear witness to the fact of His Resurrection, a fundamental truth in the System of the Gospel. For this duty it was essential that their personal intercourse with Him should be constant; and, hence, St. Peter speaks of them as “ witnesses chosen before of GOD . . . who did eat and drink with Him after He rose from the dead” (Acts i. 21, 22; comp. x. 41). The marks of the Apostolic office were these: Personal intercourse with CHRIST; appointment by Himself; the gift of the HOLY SPIRIT breathed on them by CHRIST, and more plentifully bestowed on the day of Pentecost, thus enabling them to work miracles and to speak in foreign tongues; to which was added the power to confer that gift on others. The union of these qualifications rendered it impossible for the Apostles to have successors in office, and thus they were distinguished from every other class of ministers, whether Deacons, Evangelists, Pastors or Bishops.

The time is not certainly determined when our LORD separated the Apostles from His disciples and followers to their distinctive office. They were from the lower ranks of life, and it appears that some of them at least had been with Him before they were called as Apostles, but after their appointment they remained continuously in His service. They were all on an equality, so far as official rank was concerned, during and after the ministry of CHRIST on earth. St. Peter, indeed, from his emotional and energetic character, was usually prominent among them, and enjoyed the distinguished honor of founding the Jewish and Gentile Churches (Acts ii. 14, 42; xi. 11; comp. Rev. xxi. 14; Eph. ii. 20); but we never find in Scripture the slightest trace of primacy or official superiority assigned to him. It is true that he and James and John, the sons of Zebedee, are admitted to the inner privacy of our LORD'S acts and experiences on several occasions (Matt. xvii. 1-9; xxvi. 37; Mark v. 37), but this is no evidence of superiority and distinction in office.

Early in our LORD'S ministry they were sent out, two and two, to preach repentance and perform miracles in His name (Matt. x.; Luke ix.). They were warned by their Master of the solemn character of their office. They were with Him in His journeyings, while teaching and attending the Jewish feasts. They saw His wonderful works, heard His discourses and conversations with the people (Matt. xix. 13; Luke x. 25). They recognized Him as their Master and the CHRIST of GOD (Matt. xvi. 16; Luke ix. 20), but while they ascribed supernatural power to Him, they made slow progress in comprehending the true import of His spiritual teaching, being blinded by their national prejudices (Matt. xv. 16; xvi. 22; xvii. 20, 21; Luke ix. 54; xxiv. 25; John xvi. 12). They were obliged to seek explanations of His simplest parables, and even when our LORD was led to death they had learned but little of the true nature of His kingdom (Luke xxiv. 21; John xvi. 12), although He had been so long instructing them. They forsook Him in alarm, and even left His burial to one who was not of their number.

The fact of His Resurrection seems to have awakened their minds to a clearer conception of His mission, yet even after His exposition and intercourse some of them seem to have returned to their original calling, and it required a new direction from our LORD to recall them to their great work, and reunite them in Jerusalem (Acts i. 4).

On the Feast of Pentecost, ten days after our LORD'S Ascension, the HOLY SPIRIT descended on the infant Church (Acts ii.), and thenceforward the Apostles became different men, and with great power and boldness they gave forth their witness to the Life, Death, Resurrection and Ascension of their glorified Master and Lord, as He had predicted they should do (Luke xxiv. 48; Acts i. 8, 22; ii. 32; iii. 15; v. 32; xiii. 31).

The Mother Church in Jerusalem sprang up under their hands, and their superior dignity and authority were recognized by the rulers and the people (Acts v. 12-16). Even when St. Stephen suffered, the trial does not seem to have reached the Apostles, and when they did leave Jerusalem for Samaria they delayed not, but entered on their work in that city, and now the first period of the Apostles' agency ends. The centre of labor was Jerusalem and the central figure St. Peter. Antioch soon became the centre of a second period, and now the central figure is St. Paul, who was not one of the original Twelve, but was miraculously called and prepared by our LORD, who regularly qualified and commissioned him for the work. Here a Church of Jews and Gentiles was soon gathered (Acts xi. 19-30; xiii. 1-5) by the united labors of St. Paul and other Apostles. Intimate intercourse existed between the Churches at Antioch and Jerusalem. From this time a third period opens, in which the original Twelve Apostles disappear, and the prominent figure in the subsequent history is St. Paul, the great Apostle of the Gentiles. When the narrative leaves him at Rome, all the Gentile Churches from Jerusalem round about to Illyricum owe to him their foundation and look to him for spiritual direction and Apostolic care. The others disappear from the page of inspired history, and when they were removed by death, the Apostolic office ceased as a matter of course, for its continuance was from the very conditions of its existence (comp. 1 Cor. ix. 1) absolutely impossible. The Bishops and Pastors of the ancient Churches co-existed with, and did not in any sense succeed, the Apostles in the things which were peculiar to their office; and thus it is evident that it can only be chronologically, and not officially, that in the Church there can be any persons who are Successors of the Apostles.

§Peter

Peter.—His original name was Simon. He was the son of Jonas, and was brought up to his father's occupation as a fisherman on the Sea of Galilee. He and his brother Andrew were partners of John and James, the sons of Zebedee. Various allusions in the sacred narrative seem to indicate that their social position was easy, and that they had a fair measure of education. Peter lived first at Bethsaida and afterward at Capernaum, in a house which he or his mother-in-law owned; and it must have been a large one, as he received in it not only our LORD, but multitudes who were attracted by the miracles and the preaching of JESUS (Matt. xix. 27, etc.). The passage in Acts iv. 13, where Peter and John are called “unlearned and ignorant men,” does not necessarily mean that they were illiterate, but rather that they were “laymen,” i.e., men of ordinary education when contrasted with those who were educated in the schools of the Rabbis. That he was an affectionate husband and married in early life are facts inferred from Scripture. Clement of Alexandria, and others, tell us that his wife's name was Perpetua, that she had children and that she suffered martyrdom. The impression prevailed that Peter was advanced in life at the time of his death, but there is no evidence to prove that he was much older than our LORD. He was probably only between thirty and forty when called, along with Andrew, at the Lake of Galilee. Thereafter James and John were appointed, and ere long Peter and his eleven fellow-disciples were set apart as our LORD'S immediate attendants (Matt. x. 2, 4; Mark iii. 13-19; Luke vi. 13). From this time forward Peter held a prominent place among the Apostles. His energy and boldness urged him forward, but he held no distinct office above his brethren, and he certainly never claimed any power which did not equally belong to his associates. It would appear that his consciousness of ability and devotion to his Master seemed to develop a tendency to rashness that verged on presumption. He even incurred a severe rebuke from our LORD (Matt. xvi. 23) because of his dictatorial manner, and yet it is obvious that, bold as he no doubt was, he frequently manifested his greatest weakness immediately after some decided display of resolute devotion, as may be seen by his anxiety to find out who among the Apostles would prove a traitor, loudly asseverating his own purpose of steadfastness, and then forthwith in a moment of weakness miserably denying his LORD (Matt. xxvi. 33-35; Mark xiv. 29-31; Luke xxii. 33, 34; John xiii. 36, 38).

He was restored again after his fall by our LORD at the Lake of Galilee, and the prediction of his death showed him that he would indeed be permitted to follow his glorified Master. After the Ascension he and his colleagues were to govern and extend the Church that their Master had founded, and the narrative of the Acts of the Apostles presents him as a leader, although neither exercising nor claiming any authority or superiority over his brethren. Before Annas and Caiaphas the boldness of Peter and John was observable, and they utterly refused to be time-servers. Miracles of healing and of judgment, as in the case of Ananias and Sapphira, were wrought by Peter, and from Jerusalem he and John were sent to Samaria. There he was confronted with Simon Magus, and about three years later he came into contact with Paul (Acts ix. 26 and Gal. i. 17, 18). The baptism of Cornelius was the crown and consummation of the ministry of Peter, as it was the first-fruits and the earnest of the great Gentile harvest. Shortly afterward he was imprisoned by Herod Agrippa (Acts xii.), and his miraculous deliverance closes the second great period of his ministry.

From this time there is no continuous history of him. He left Jerusalem, but the scene of his labors is not recorded. Six years later he returned, when the Apostles and elders assembled to settle the question about circumcision. It was at Antioch where the painful collision between him and Paul occurred, when an essential point in Christian discipline and living was determined. That Peter preached in the provinces mentioned in his first Epistle is mere conjecture, but there is reason to believe that he did reside for a time at Babylon. If he ever visited Rome, it must have been toward the close of his life. There is no allusion in the Epistle to the Romans to his having been in the Roman capital, and the traditions and evidence bearing on the controversy are confused and contradictory. Clement, Ignatius, Dionysius, Irenæus, Caius, Origen, Tertullian and others testify to the fact that he was at Rome, and that he and Paul suffered martyrdom there about the same time, and yet the evidence on the other side is so exceedingly weighty that it may be considered an unsettled question. He may have been in Rome, and even suffered martyrdom there, but it is morally certain that he was never Bishop of the Church, and that he never claimed a primacy there or elsewhere over his brethren.

§Andrew

Andrew was one among the first-called of the Apostles. He was brother to Peter, but whether older or younger is uncertain. He was of Bethsaida, and had been a disciple of John the Baptist. With another of John's disciples he brought his brother Peter, and they attached themselves to JESUS. In the catalogue of the Apostles his name appears second in Matthew and Luke, but in Mark and Acts he is enrolled after Peter, James and John as the fourth, and in company with Philip. He appears to have enjoyed great intimacy with our LORD, and to have been assiduous in his duties (John xii. 22; vi. 8). There are few details given of him in Scripture, and many of the traditions are quite uncertain. Eusebius makes him preach in Scythia, Jerome and Theodoret in Achaia (Greece), and Nicephorus in Asia Minor and Thrace. He is said to have been crucified at Patræ, in Achaia, on a cross “ decussate,” hence called after his name.

§James and John

James and John, the sons of Zebedee.—In the spring or summer of the year 27, Zebedee, a fisherman, was on the Sea of Galilee with his two sons engaged at their occupation. Near them was another boat with Simon and Andrew, all of them being partners. Being unsuccessful, they landed and began to wash their nets. The new Teacher (JESUS) appeared on the beach, and at His call they left all and became His disciples. The leading incidents in the career of James may be briefly stated. In the following year he was confirmed as an Apostle, and witnessed the miraculous healing of Jairus' daughter. In the spring of 28 he was present at the Transfiguration. Very early in the year 29 he urged our LORD to call fire down from heaven to consume a Samaritan village, and about three months later he and his brother made their ambitious request through their mother Salome. On the night before the crucifixion he was with our LORD in Gethsemane. He witnessed the Ascension, and shortly before the Passover, in the year 44, he was put to death (Acts xii. 1) by Herod Agrippa.

§John

John is generally believed to have been younger than his brother James. His life may be divided into three periods: 1. Before his call to the discipleship he no doubt lived with his parents in or near Bethsaida, and little is known of him. When the voice of John the Baptist was heard in the wilderness of Judea and multitudes flocked to hear him, the sons of Zebedee were among the number. 2. But a greater than John arose, and these brethren attached themselves to Him. Peter, James and John came within the innermost circle of our LORD'S friends. He enjoyed the memorable distinction of being the disciple whom JESUS loved. He witnessed the Transfiguration, and was with Him during His agony. He was the first of the disciples to recognize our LORD after His Resurrection, and his zeal was unwearied in the company of Peter in the expansion of the Church. Fifteen years after Paul's first visit to Jerusalem he was there, at the settlement of the great question which had agitated the Church, and his position and influence were those of one who was known to be a chief “pillar” in the Church (Gal. ii. 9). 3. The traditions of a later age connect him with Ephesus after his departure from Jerusalem. It is held that the seven Asiatic Churches were his special charge, and that he had much to do in saving them from soul-destroying error. Persecution drove him to the island of Patmos, where he labored in the mines, and where he received the Revelations which close the New Testament. Polycarp, Ignatius and Papias were his disciples; and at a great age, and after seeing the Church extended from Palestine westward to Italy and Gaul, he died, and so the last of the Apostles of our LORD passed away.

§Philip

Philip was of Bethsaida, the city of Andrew and Peter (John i. 44), and probably was among the followers of John the Baptist. It is probable that from Andrew he learned that the CHRIST had appeared. In the Gospels his name usually occurs at the head of the second group of four, as Peter's name is at that of the first (Matt. x. 3; Mark iii. 18; Luke vi. 14). The first three Gospels tell us few facts about him, but John records a few important utterances. After the Ascension and the day of Pentecost all is uncertain about his history.

§Bartholomew

Bartholomew, one of the twelve, was probably born at Cana of Galilee. He is said to have preached the Gospel in India, but if he went eastward, it is likely that his labors were not extended beyond Arabia-Felix. There is a tradition which connects him with Armenia, and reports him to have been there flayed alive and then crucified with his head downward.

§Thomas

Thomas.—Nearly all that we know of him is derived from the Gospel of John, where he is represented as a man slow to believe, seeing the dark side of any question, subject to despondency, but filled with attachment to our LORD. The earlier traditions represent him as preaching in Parthia or Persia, and the Church in Malabar in India is reputed to have been founded by him, but this is evidently an error, as a Nestorian Thomas who labored in India was no doubt the missionary of that province.

§Matthew

Matthew, the Publican, was the writer of the Gospel that is called by his name. He had been a farmer of the taxes, or a public officer, engaged, no doubt, by a Roman knight or some man of high standing. Eusebius says that after our LORD'S Ascension Matthew preached for fifteen years in Judea, and then went to foreign nations. Socrates Scholasticus says he labored in Ethiopia. Ambrose sends him to Persia, Isidore to the Macedonians, while others hold that he preached among the Medes and Persians, but nothing is really known of his later history.

§James and Jude

James, the son of Alpheus, and his younger brother Jude, appear to have been called to the Apostolate in the year 27. It is likely that James had taken part in the effort to restrain the SAVIOUR, as mentioned in Mark iii. 21; John vii. 7. We hear no more of him until after the Crucifixion and the Resurrection, and again he is lost sight of for ten years. When Paul came to Jerusalem we find James on a level with Peter deciding the course to be adopted toward Paul. Tradition places him over the Church in Jerusalem, and Hegesippus says that before Vespasian began the siege of the city he was thrown down from the temple by the Scribes and Pharisees; he was then stoned, and his brains were dashed out by a fuller's club.

§Lebbeus

Lebbeus was a name of the Apostle Judas or Jude, the brother of James, of whose later history nothing is known. Tradition connects him with the Church at Edessa.

§Simon

Simon, the Canaanite (Zelotes, Luke vi. 15; Acts i. 13), was one of the twelve, but nothing is known of his later life. He is reported to have labored in Egypt, Cyrene and Mauritania, and to have been crucified in Judea in the reign of Domitian.

§Judas Iscariot

Judas Iscariot is called the son of Simon in John vi. 71 and xiii. 2, 26, but in the other Gospels he receives no other name but Iscariot, the meaning of which is conjectural. We can scarcely hope to explain fully the reasons why such a man was called to the Apostolate, but the choice was not made without a foreseeing of the issue (John vi. 64). As soon as the Twelve had to accompany our LORD in a body, it became necessary that provision should be made for their wants; and their form of life (Luke viii. 3) brought the temptation before which he fell. The Galilean or Judean peasant was entrusted with larger sums than he had ever owned, and covetousness, unfaithfulness, the lust of the world, overpowered him. He became infuriated when he perceived that his Master had read his heart, and in the madness of his rage he sold “the innocent ONE for thirty pieces of silver.” What he did after the betrayal is not recorded, further than that the sight of his enormity so filled him with remorse that life became intolerable, and he died a hopeless suicide. It would appear that the rope by which he sought to hang himself gave way, and so, falling headlong, his abdomen was lacerated, and thus he died, as it were, a double death, and so went to his own lot.