2

13, seq.; Luke vi. 13, seq.; cf. John vi. 70), and appointed heralds of the kingdom of God (Mark iii. 14); whose names are to be found also in Matt. x. 2, seq. (though without any mention of their selection). They were educated for this calling (the kηpúσσev) by companionship and instruction; moreover, Jesus assigned them for their aid the power of healing diseases and casting out demons. See, generally, W. Cave, Antiquitates Apostolica; or, The History of the Apostles, Lond. 1677 (German, Leip. 1724, 8vo.); F. Spanhem. De Apostolatu et Apostolis in s. Dissertatt. histor. quaternio, Ludg. Bat. 1679, 8vo.; J. F. Buddei, Eccles. Apost.. Jen. 1729, 8vo.; Fr. Burmann, Exercitt. Academ., ii. 104, seq.; Hess, Gesch. u. Schrift. d. Apostel J., Zürich, 1821, iii. 8vo.; G. J. Planck, Gesch. des Chistenth. in der Periode seiner ersten Einführung in die Welt durch Jesum und die Apostel, Götting. 1818, ii. 8vo.; K. Wilhelmi Christi Apostel u. erste Bekenner oder Geschichte der Apostel, etc., Heidelb., 1825, 8vo. (Capelli Historia Apostol. Illustr., Genev. 1634, 4to., Salmur. 1683, 4to., Frankf. 1691, 8vo., refers almost exclusively to the Apostle Paul; and J. H. G. von Einem, Historia Chr. et Apostol., Goett. 1758, 4to., likewise Rullmann, De Apostolis, Rint., 1789, 4to., are of little importance.) The names of those chosen by Jesus were: Simon Peter, Andrew, James (the son of

3

in relation to an historical event, where all the twelve were no longer together, the expression oi dúdeka is used (1 Cor. xv. 5) as the regular appellation of the college.

2 Because both John and Matthew say nothing of the act of choosing the Apostles; already Schleiermacher (Ueber die Schrift des Lucas, p. 88) denied that there ever were any formal calling and investiture of all the twelve Apostles (cf. Strauss, Leben Jesu, i. 549, f.). The fact that some of the Apostles early attached themselves to Jesus (Matt. iv. 19, f.; 21, f.; John i. 35, ff.) cannot be said to make the choice and determination of a fixed number to be the messengers of faith improbable; while, on the other hand, one can very easily conceive how those disciples, who had been gained under remarkable circumstances, should have been thus specially taken notice of. The Apostles always appear in the Evangelists, even in John (cf. vi. 67), as an assembly constituted of twelve, and indeed in such a manner, that, when Judas was separated from them, they themselves considered it necessary to fill up the college (Acts i. 15, ff.). John also (xv. 16) represents Jesus himself as referring to the act whereby they were chosen. Besides, it is very natural, if Jesus was in the habit of looking into the future, that he should early select special continuators of his work, upon the formation of whose character he could exercise immediate influence, and the remarkable number twelve would not be collected by accident. The addition of Paul in later times to the Apostolic College much less interfered with the intention of Christ, and the consecration which His personal selection gave unto those whom He chose, than the choosing of Matthias, for Paul considered himself as personally chosen by Christ. Finally, άπóστoλos is never absolutely used of any other persons than the Apostles themselves (Paul being included). This holds true even of Rom. xvi. 7. Nor can it be regarded as interfering with the name of this office, that fellow-labourers of the Apostles should be called the άTóσTOλo (the delegates) of a particular church-community (2 Cor. viii. 23; Phil. ii. 25). See further Hase, Leben Jesu, p. 111.

3 The arrangement of the Apostles is almost the very same in the catalogues contained in the three Evangelists. There is, however, a slight difference, Acts i. 13. There the names are ranked in pairs. The first two pairs cousist of pairs of brothers, Peter and Andrew, James the Greater and John; and these names thus follow each other in Matthew and Luke, whereas Mark places Andrew last. The third pair are Philip and Bartholomew; the fourth, Thomas and Matthew, or, according to

Luke

of Zebedee), John, Philip, Bartholomew, Thomas, Matthew (Levi), James (the son of Alpheus), Lebbeus (Thaddeus), Simon, and Judas Iscariot. They were all unlearned (J. Lami, De Eruditione Apostolor. [Flor. 1738, 8vo.] c. 2 and 75), simple, trainable men from among the people, mostly Galileans (for Jesus was convinced that spiritual regeneration must and would take its rise from among the people, Matt. xi. 25), partly related unto Jesus and the companions of His youth, some of them formerly the disciples of John the Baptist. There was no order of rank among the Apostles; and although, in Matt. xvi. 18, a pre-eminent part in the founding of the Christian church is allotted to Peter (see the interpreters on the passage), and he, even apart from this, stands forward already in the Gospels before the others, yet he was not therefore the superior (Vorgesetzter) of the other Apostles; nor was he recognized as such in the apostolic church (see the article PETER). Jesus early made the Apostles acquainted with the whole earnestness, yea, even with the sure danger of their calling (Matt. x. 17). He did not communicate to them, however, what might properly be called esoteric instruction. As the whole teaching of Jesus had a practical tendency, so it possessed no mysteries for the initiated. The Apostles accompanied Him when He went about teaching; and when He journeyed to the feasts, they beheld His noble deeds, they listened to His addresses to the people (Matt. v. 1, seq.; xxiii. 1, seq.; Luke iv. 13, seq.), and heard His conversations with the learned Jews (Matt. xix. 13, seq.; Luke x. 25, seq.). They attended Him (especially the more intimate of them, Peter, John, and James the Elder) not unfrequently in private (Matt. xvii. 1, seq.), and conversed with Him, requesting in

6

Luke and Mark, invertedly, Matthew and Thomas; the fifth and sixth pairs have the greatest variation (James the Less, Judas, Thaddeus, Simon the Canaanite, and Judas Iscariot, or, according to Luke, James the Less, Simon the Canaanite, Judas, Thaddeus, Judas Iscariot), Judas, however, always being placed last. There were doubtless various reasons on account of which the chief persons occupied a fixed order. See Clemen. in my Zeitsch. für wissenschaf. Theol., iii. 334, ff.; Meyer on Matt., x. 2.

For the names of the Apostles, in Mohammedan tradition, see Thilo, Apoc., i. 152.

....

5 Arnobius, i. P. 8. Ne qua subesset suspicio magicis se artibus munera illa beneficiaque largitum ex immensa illa populi multitudine. . . . piscatores, opifices, rusticanos atque id genus delegit imperitorum, qui per varias gentes missi cuncta illa miracula sine ullis fucis atque adminiculis perpetrarent.'-Neander, Leb. Jesu, p. 226, f.

Jesus made more lengthened journeys only in summer at the time of the feasts, which every religious Jew was wont to celebrate; His shorter visits to places situated in the neighbourhood of Capernaum certainly did not occupy the whole of His time. Thus could the Apostles be almost constantly in His company (cf. Acts i. 21), without entirely giving up their civil occupations or forsaking their homes (cf. Mark i. 29), for some of the Apostles were married (Matt. viii. 14; 1 Cor. ix. 5; see Euseb., Hist. Eccles, iii. 30; J. A. Schmid, Diss. de Apostolis Uxoratis. Helmst., 1704 [Vitab. 1734], 4to.; cf. Deyling, Observatt., iii. 469, seqq.; Ch. M. Pfaff, De Circumductione soror. mulierum Apostolicu, Tubing., 1751, 4to.; and Schulthess, Neuest. Theol. Nachricht, 1828, i. 130, ft.). Concerning the advantage which could arise to apostolic labours from the accompanying aid of such wives of Apostles (1 Cor. ix. 5), see Clemens Alex., Strom., iii. p. 191. This father regarded only the adeλph (1 Cor. ix. 5) as improper.

formation

formation (Matt. xv. 15, seq.; xviii. 1, seq.; Luke viii. 9, seq.; xii. 41; xvii. 5; John ix. 2, seq.) on religious matters, sometimes in reference to the declarations of Jesus, sometimes generally (Matt. xiii. 10, seq.); yea, they were once even sent to proclaim the kingdom of God (Mark vi. 7, seq.; Luke ix. 6, seq.), and happily brought about cures (Mark vi. 13; Luke ix. 6), although in this last particular they were not always successful (Matt. xvii. 16.) They indeed recognized Jesus (Matt. xvi. 16; Luke ix. 20) as the Messiah (ò Xpɩròç Toυ Оɛoũ), endowed with mighty power (Luke xi. 54); yet, being hindered by weak powers of comprehension and national prejudices, they made slow progress in the comprehension of the spiritual doctrine and design of their Master (Matt. xv. 16; xvi. 22; xvii. 20, seq.; Luke ix. 54; John xvi. 12). They found it necessary to ask Him the meaning of simple, plain parables (Luke xii. 41, seq.), confessed openly the weakness of their faith (Luke xvii. 5), and, even at the departure of Jesus from the earth, although they had for more than two years (see the art. JESUS) been carefully reared and instructed step by step (Matt. xvi. 21), they were still weak in understanding (Luke xxiv. 21; cf. John xvi. 21). See Vollborth, De Discip. Christi per gradus ad dignitatem et potent. Apostol. evectis, Gotting. 1790, 4to.; Bagge, De sapientia Christi in Electione, Institutione, et Missione Apostolor., Jen. 1754, 4to.; Ziez, Quomodo Notio de Messia in animis App. sensim sensimque clariorem acceperit lucem, Lubec, 1793, ii. 4to.; Liebe, in Augusti N. Theol. Blätt., ii. i. 42, seq.; Ernesti, De Præclara Chr. in App. instituendis sapientia et prudentia, Gotting. 1834, 4to.; Neander, Leb. J., 229, seq. cf. also E. A. Ph. Mahn, Comm. in qua ducibus IV. Evangg. Apostolorumque Scriptis distinguuntur tempora et notantur viæ, quib. Apostoli Jesu doctrinam divin. sensim sensimque melius perspexerint, Gotting. 1809, 4to. Even the symbolical consecration (Weihe), which, under such solemn circumstances, they received at the last supper (Matt. xxvi. 26, seq.; Mark xiv. 22, seq.; Luke xxii. 17, seq.), neither kindled enthusiasm within them (Matt. xxvi. 40, seq.), nor preserved them from disconsolateness at the death of Jesus (Mark xvi. 14, seq.; Luke xxiv. 13, seq., 36, seq.; John xx. 9, 25, seq.). They left the burial of the Lord to women and one who was not an Apostle; and his indubitably proven resurrection first gathered them together again. Yet many of them went back again to their occupations (John xxi. 3, seq.), and it required a new injunction of their Master (Matt. xxviii. 18, seq.) to bring them again to their calling and to assemble them in Jerusalem (Acts i. 4). Here they continued in pious communion of the Holy Spirit (John xx. 22), whom Jesus had promised unto them as the Comforter (John xiv. 26; xvi. 13; Acts i. 8); and, soon after the departure of the Divine Teacher, on the feast of Pentecost, which was commemorative of the establishment of the Old Covenant, being affected by an extraordinary phenomenon, they felt the power of this Spirit entering into them (Acts

it

7 The occurrence in Acts ii. is to be explained partly psychologically, and partly may be embellished in the tradition of the tale. The disciples, awaiting the promised τveûμa, were assembled together on the feast of the giving of the law,

and

(Acts ii.), and hesitated not-after they had by the election of Matthias (see the article) redintegrated the number of the Twelve, which had been diminished by the apostacy of Judas (Acts i. 15, seq.)—as the witnesses of the life and resurrection of their Lord (Luke xxiv. 48; Acts i. 8, 22; ii. 32; iii. 15; v. 32; xiii. 31), to begin with courage and success (Acts ii. 41) the proclamation of the kingdom of God in the holy city itself. Their calling was now determined, and clear light was now manifested to them in regard to many things that had formerly been dark (John ii. 22; xii. 16: see Henke in Pott, Sylloge, i. 19, seq.). The mother assembly at Jerusalem became, under the eyes of the Apostles, and not without their personal sacrifice, a society inwardly united, though as yet by no means outwardly separated from the Jewish cultus (Acts iii.-vii.); and the apostolical activity already carried the seed of the divine word to the Samaritans, among whom Jesus (John iv.) had formerly found susceptible hearts (Acts viii. 5, seq., 14). This was the first period of apostolical labour. But still more important was the step of Peter, who, not without the aversion and disapprobation of the primitive Christians, preached (Acts x. xi.) the Gospel unto the

and were absorbed in ardent, ecstatic contemplation. There followed a peal of thunder that shook the whole building, and the ecstatic disciples saw, or believed that they saw, fiery flames (tongues, Isa. v. 24, cf. my edit. of Simon's Lexic. Hebr. p. 537), which, as symbols of the Holy Ghost, descended upon them (cf. Wetsten., ii. 462, seq.). Powerfully influenced, and affected by the nearness of the Godhead, they expressed themselves with all the vivacity of the Oriental character in burning adoration of God (Acts x. 44, seq.), and must have exhibited to those who were present an unwonted spectacle. It is very difficult to say what the λaλev ÉTÉpais yλwooais (ver. 4) actually was, and how much the legend has added to the facts of the case. It is certainly the design of Luke to relate an extraordinary wonder. This is evident from the special recounting of the foreign tongues (ver. 9, seq.); and indeed it is in relation to this that the embellishing legend may have been principally engaged. It is easily imaginable that those who spoke expressed themselves contrary to their usual custom in their different vernacular tongues (for enthusiastic persons always prefer their mother-tongue); yet one cannot in the present case see how, in the prayer-room of the Galileans (ver. 7), or even of all the then Christians (ver. 1), any considerable difference of dialect could exist. One must therefore adopt the opinion that in the room referred to there were Jews present from different lands; or, is the astonishment of the multitude to be regarded only as the result of the eloquent enthusiasm with which (in an unusual language!) the Galileans expressed themselves, and the dressing up of the érépais yλwoσais to be looked upon only as the product of the wonder-working legend? At all events, it must be confessed, that all the difficulties of this relation cannot be cleared up; and that, in whatever manner it is to be regarded, a merely natural view of the matter cannot be reckoned the opinion of the historian. Cf. the different, and partly_most absurd, notions of expositors, especially Kuinöl and De Wette, on Acts ii.; J. Schulthess, De Charismatibus Spir. Sancti, Lips. 1818, i. 8vo.; Schulz, Geistesgaben der ersten Christen, Breslau, 1836, 8vo.; Neander, Pflanz, i. 11, seq. Hoffmann of late (Weissag., ii. 207, seq.) seeks to destroy all scientific investigations, as above, concerning the γλ. ἑτέρ. λαλεῖν.

8 According to an old legend, the Apostles in the preaching of the Gospel divided the countries of the (then known) world (Socrat., Hist. Eccles., i. 19; Rufin., Hist. Eccles., i. 9; cf. Theodoret, Ad Ps. cxvi. 1: tradition still points out the spot in Jerusalem where this took place, see F. Fabri, i. 269); and it is to this that the Festum divisionis Apostolor. (15th July) refers. Such a division, however, is refuted by the long-continued particularism of the Apostles, and is certainly nothing else than a dogmatic production.

heathen

heathen on the sea-coast; for this was the signal for the organization of a second and considerable assembly in Antioch, the Syrian capital, (Acts xi. 21), with which the assembly at Jerusalem placed itself in friendly correspondence (Acts xi. 22, seq.). This was the second period of apostolic labour. But what had hitherto taken place was at once thrown in the shade by the vigorous conduct of Paul, a Pharisee, who had been won for the apostolic calling in a wonderful manner. Although regarded at first with suspicion, he was able by his energetic personality to obtain the consent and approbation of the Apostles (Acts xiii.). Yet he found himself preferably situated in Antioch, whence, with the assistance of powerful companions, whom he instructed, he carried the Gospel into far distant heathen lands, leaving to others (to Peter, cf. Gal. ii. 7) the conversion of the Jews. This was the third period of apostolic labour. Henceforth Paul is the central point of the Acts of the Apostles; even Peter gradually disappears; and it is not till after the removal of Paul from Asia Minor that John again appears, quietly but powerfully working in small circles. Thus it was a man, who perhaps was personally unacquainted with Christ, who at least was not trained and consecrated by Him to be an Apostle, who accomplished more for Christianity than all the immediate Apostles, not only extensively and in reference to the geographical surface of his exertions, but also intensively, since he it was that determined the universal tendency of the Christian scheme of salvation, and sought to reconcile with learning the simple doctrine of heaven. It is remarkable that it should have been a Pharisee, who should have most thoroughly followed out the world-historical spirit of Christianity! With the exception of what is related incidentally in the work of Luke concerning Peter, John (Acts viii. 14), and the two Jameses (Acts xii. 2, 17; xv. 13; xxi. 18), the accredited history makes nothing further known about the Apostles of Jesus. There are tales, partly out of ancient times (Euseb., Hist. Eccles., iii. 1), concerning nearly all the Apostles (see the Acta Apostolor. Apocrypha, which are generally ascribed to a certain Abdias, in Fabric., Cod. Apocryph., i. 402, seqq.; and W. Cave, Antiquitates Apos., see above; also Perionii, Vitæ Apostolor., Par. 1551, 16to, and Frankf. 1744, 8vo."). As, however, they partly contradict each other, and their gradual growth can often be traced, they must be carefully sifted. But all things being duly considered, we may warrantably infer that James (see the article), after the execution of the elder James (Acts xii. 2), generally resided at Jerusalem (cf. Acts xii. 17), and was recognized as the director of the affairs of the Apostles (Acts xv. 13; xxi. 18; Gal. ii. 9), whereas Peter journeyed mostly as a missionary among the Jews (añóorodos tūs repiroμñs, Gal. ii. 8) ; and, finally, John (all the three are called σrúλot of the assembly, Gal. ii. 9) was engaged at Ephesus in spreading and rearing disciples for the practical, heartfelt character of Christianity, which was already endangered by Gnostic tendencies. Though we cannot regard the labours

9 Ludewig. Die Apostel J. oder mannichf. Nachricht, und Untersuch, histor.-krit, Art über die Schicksale u, das Wirken d. Apostel. Quedlinb. 1841, 8vo. ; Jod. Heringa, Quæstion, de Vitis Apostolor., Tielae, 1844, 8vo.

of