There are some gaps in knowledge of Jesus' inner band after his resurrection.
Itinerant Jesus had a specific band of 12 men. He named them "Apostles". One betrayed Jesus to the religious unbelievers who wanted him dead. Thereafter the text mentions "the Eleven", but rarely, and apparently not as Peter intended.
and returning from the tomb they told all these things to the eleven and to all the rest (Luke 24:9 ESV). That is on resurrection day.
Now the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain to which Jesus had directed them (Matthew 28:16 ESV). That is some time later.
Jesus had the Twelve; then the Eleven; then....
Jesus' had the particular group from his followers. The Synoptics tell us about their selection: During those days he went out to the mountain to pray and spent all night in prayer to God. When daylight came, he summoned his disciples, and he chose twelve of them, whom he also named apostles: Simon, whom he also named Peter, and Andrew his brother; James and John; Philip and Bartholomew; Matthew and Thomas; James the son of Alphaeus, and Simon called the Zealot; Judas the son of James, and Judas Iscariot, who became a traitor (Luke 6:12-16 CSB). Now he had the twelve. Was Jesus' all night prayer for wisdom and insight? Perhaps? No way to know.
At one point the twelve became a kind of extension or multiplier of Jesus' presence in the land: Jesus called together his twelve apostles and gave them complete power over all demons and diseases. Then he sent them to tell about God's kingdom and to heal the sick. He told them, “Don't take anything with you! Don't take a walking stick or a traveling bag or food or money or even a change of clothes. When you are welcomed into a home, stay there until you leave that town. If people won't welcome you, leave the town and shake the dust from your feet[a] as a warning to them.”
The apostles left and went from village to village, telling the good news and healing people everywhere (Luke 9:1-6 CEV). Here they are called his twelve and his apostles. Their role was clear - a kind of "warm up" but more. If dust was shaken off, would Jesus bypass that town? I think so. A serious matter; hearing God's message brings more than an opportunity to be restored to health. People were being given a final opportunity to heed God's Word. Final!
But still more needed to hear. And so a little further on Luke reports: After this, the Lord appointed seventy-two[a] others, and he sent them ahead of him in pairs to every town and place where he himself was about to go. He told them, “The harvest is abundant, but the workers are few. Therefore, pray to the Lord of the harvest to send out workers into his harvest. Now go; I’m sending you out like lambs among wolves. Don’t carry a money-bag, traveling bag, or sandals; don’t greet anyone along the road. Whatever house you enter, first say, ‘Peace to this household.’ If a person of peace is there, your peace will rest on him; but if not, it will return to you....
When you enter any town, and they don’t welcome you, go out into its streets and say, ‘We are wiping off even the dust of your town that clings to our feet as a witness against you. Know this for certain: The kingdom of God has come near.’ I tell you, on that day it will be more tolerable for Sodom than for that town (Luke 10:1-6, 10-12 CSB). Now I reject any suggestion that Luke got it wrong. Or that Jesus did not know what he was doing. He evidently had a lot more followers than twelve and he made 70 (or 72) of them his advance party. Was Jesus conscious of a limited amount of time remaining? See this from the previous chapter, coming between the above two pericopes: As the time approached for him to be taken up to heaven, Jesus resolutely set out for Jerusalem (Luke 9:51 NIV). Perhaps that explains well enough the second appointment. Again, their message is good news - but sadly to those who reject Jesus it is bad news. What of today? Does Jesus want people to be given the opportunity? That is a serious (eternal) matter.
There came a moment when people decided to unfollow Jesus; they were disillusioned. Perhaps they had never accepted Jesus as himself. The pericope is found in John, chapter 6. It ends thus: From this time many of his disciples turned back and no longer followed him. "You do not want to leave too, do you?” Jesus asked the Twelve.
Simon Peter answered him, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life. We have come to believe and to know that you are the Holy One of God.”
Then Jesus replied, “Have I not chosen you, the Twelve? Yet one of you is a devil!” (He meant Judas, the son of Simon Iscariot, who, though one of the Twelve, was later to betray him.) (John 6:66-71 NIV). Note the emphasis on the fact of Judas being one of those Jesus had chosen for himself. Does this suggest that, in his heart, Judas was also leaving then, though he physically remained in the band till the betrayal? What do you think?
Do you think it really strange that Jesus could know Judas as a "devil", but still keep him in the band of twelve? I note that Jesus does not speak of him as satan. At one point Jesus did speak sharply to Peter and call Peter satan: But turning and looking at his disciples, he rebuked Peter and said, “Get behind me, Satan! For you are setting your mind not on divine things but on human things” (Mark 8:33 NRSVUE). Who of us may have a wrong mindset? If Jesus not only rebuked but turned away everyone who ever committed evil deeds who would be left? What if he turned away anyone who got it wrong? (That does NOT happen!)
Late in the account Jesus spoke of the end of all things; about what lay ahead; about true riches not being in perishable wealth.
Then Peter said in reply, “See, we have left everything and followed you. What then will we have?” Jesus said to them, “Truly, I say to you, in the new world,[a] when the Son of Man will sit on his glorious throne, you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or children or lands, for my name's sake, will receive a hundredfold[b] and will inherit eternal life. But many who are first will be last, and the last first (Matthew 19:27-30 ESV). The picture for "everyone" is clear, even if not literal! What of the twelve?
In company with Jesus, the twelve are to be the judges of the "twelve tribes". That may seem obscure, as the tribal structure had long gone. In the early history of their nation there had been individual judges established by God for the benefit and assistance of his people. They were deliverers. Whenever the Lord raised up a judge over Israel, he was with that judge and rescued the people from their enemies throughout the judge’s lifetime. For the Lord took pity on his people, who were burdened by oppression and suffering. But when the judge died, the people returned to their corrupt ways, behaving worse than those who had lived before them. They went after other gods, serving and worshiping them. And they refused to give up their evil practices and stubborn ways (Judges 2:18-19 NLT). Evil practices and stubborn ways - really? Why? Why not give up what seems desirable; seems good, but is actually disobedient to God? Judges did stuff; not always what I would call their best.
The judges were the final authority then in the dominion. Here Jesus gives the Twelve a preeminent place, beneath his place, in his dominion. The picture used is that of the more ancient nation. I wonder how Peter and the others, including Judas Iscariot, understood it? What new world? What throne? They did apparently carry forward beyond the resurrection (Acts 1) their notion of a renovated state. (That was never to be.)
During the final week Jesus left Jerusalem for the night. And he entered Jerusalem and went into the temple. And when he had looked around at everything, as it was already late, he went out to Bethany with the twelve (Mark 11:11 ESV). That would have restricted any opportunity for Judas to take the action he did. I wonder when Judas decided to commit and made his deal with the unbelieving religious leaders? We read that he carried out his action during their last meal together (see previous post).
Jesus died. Jesus rose again. That first day had many strands. The group had direct encounter with the risen Lord. Except for one (actually two). But Thomas (who was called the Twin[a]), one of the twelve, was not with them when Jesus came (John 20:24 NRSVUE). So here, at the end of the first resurrection day, Thomas was elsewhere. I wonder where? Judas was not there - perhaps he was already dead? Still the title "the twelve" of the ten gathered.
A gruesome description of the fate of Judas' dead body is given in Acts, chapter 1. If the location was widely known it could not survive the Romans in 70 AD.
In the days following, Judas had been "replaced" by a man from the available pool of candidates: They drew names, and Matthias was chosen to join the group of the eleven apostles (Acts 1:26 CEV). The chapter explains how Peter lead a move to make an apostolic appointment. It is not made clear in the account that this action came from Jesus. The principles Peter cites from the Bible are of a general nature. (Matthias is not further mentioned, but then neither are some of the Eleven.)
During the following Feast of Weeks (Pentecost) in Jerusalem there was a great disturbance marking the outpouring of the Holy Spirit on all of the followers (perhaps 120 women and men). A sceptical crowd gathered. But Peter, standing with the eleven, lifted up his voice and addressed them: “Men of Judea and all who dwell in Jerusalem, let this be known to you, and give ear to my words (Acts 2:14 ESV). So, if the meaning is Peter and the eleven others, Matthias must have been counted in the apostolic band then. If I take it as the same eleven as previously, then Matthias was not replacing Judas in that description. They were the eleven because Judas had opted out.
Some weeks later the Apostles had an administrative (welfare) problem in Jerusalem. The Twelve summoned the whole company of the disciples and said, “It would not be right for us to give up preaching the word of God to wait on tables (Acts 6:2 CSB). The moment was resolved. I note the use at that late stage of "The Twelve". Is that title or label "twelve" simply a shorthand for the eleven who had been in the original team? Or was Matthias then firmly included in Judas' place? No answer.
The word "apostles" occurs many more times: Now the apostles and the brothers and sisters who were in Judea heard that the gentiles had also accepted the word of God (Acts 11:1 NRSVUE). That "apostles" may be the twelve/eleven. However, read on a bit and you find Paul and Barnabas and others described as "apostles" (eg, Acts 14).
An interesting example of the use of the word comes here: Greet Andronicus and Junia, my fellow Israelites who were in prison with me; they are prominent among the apostles, and they were in Christ before I was (Romans 16:7 NRSVUE). This prominent pair of apostles include a woman! Probably. Translators are fairly sure the female name "Junia" is correct. Commentators have more of a problem...!
The term twelve (eleven) faded from the record. What happened then to the twelve thrones? Twelve tribes? Israel? That will be another post.
In the final pages of our New Testament (NT) we find insistence on twelve apostles. The wall of the city had twelve foundations, and on them were the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb (Revelation 21:14 NIV). Which twelfth one was that, then. Could it be Judas? However, surely we are reading picture language and should not treat it as simply literal.
Finally: Is it right to think of Judas as the worst sinner; as a man who could never receive forgiveness? Jesus did not say that. He did say: For it has been determined that the Son of Man must die. But what sorrow awaits the one who betrays him” (Luke 22:22 NLT). Was that sorrow about Judas' eternal destiny? Or about his change of heart and very sad and ugly end? I want to remember these actual words of Jesus: And everyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven (Luke 12:10 NIV). Will not be forgiven. Is that because such a person hardens their heart against repenting and seeking forgiveness from God?
Jesus had said that the Holy Spirit would bring true conviction to the (willing?) heart: When he comes, he will convict the world about sin, righteousness, and judgment (John 16:8 CSB). Does the Holy Spirit continue to do that? What do you think? Can he be asked to convict?
May you be blessed by God
Allen Hampton
Scripture quotations marked (CEV) are from the Contemporary English Version Copyright © 1991, 1992, 1995 by American Bible Society. Used by Permission.
Scripture quotations marked (CSB) are from the Christian Standard Bible. Copyright © 2017 by Holman Bible Publishers. Used by permission. Christian Standard Bible®, and CSB® are federally registered trademarks of Holman Bible Publishers, all rights reserved.
Scripture quotations marked (ESV) are from the ESV® Bible (The Holy Bible, English Standard Version®), copyright © 2001 by Crossway, a publishing ministry of Good News Publishers. Used by permission. All rights reserved.
Scripture quotations marked (NIV) are taken from the Holy Bible, NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION®, NIV® Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984, 2011 by Biblica, Inc.® Used by permission. All rights reserved worldwide.
Scripture quotations marked (NLT) are taken from the Holy Bible, New Living Translation, copyright ©1996, 2004, 2007, 2013 by Tyndale House Foundation. Used by permission of Tyndale House Publishers, Inc., Carol Stream, Illinois 60188. All rights reserved.
Scripture quotations marked (NRSV) are from the New Revised Standard Version Bible, copyright © 1989 National Council of the Churches of Christ in the United States of America. Used by permission. All rights reserved.
Scripture quotations marked (NRSVUE) are from the New Revised Standard Version, Updated Edition. Copyright © 2021
Bible passages by copy and paste from
Bible GatewayBlue Letter BibleYou Bible
Image: Michelle O'Connor on Pixabay
No comments:
Post a Comment