Most of Jesus’ apostles served in Jerusalem, at least initially. We don’t have a lot of information within Scripture about their activities. Let’s start out looking what God was doing with the Apostle Paul who had been called by God to minister to Gentiles.

After serving the church in Antioch for a year, Paul and Barnabas went on their first missionary journey in 47 AD. John Mark, a nephew of Barnabas, went with them, but turned back after they sailed from Cyprus and reached Pamphylia, a region on the southern coast of what we know as Turkey today (Ac 13:13). Paul and Barnabas first taught in the synagogues wherever they went within the region of Pamphylia and Galatia and then would preach to the Gentiles and anyone who wanted to listen. Many of the Jewish leaders became jealous of Paul and Barnabas’ success and would follow them to whatever city they went to try and get the people to reject their teaching (Ac 13:19). They were able to get the people of Lystra to turn against Paul and the citizens of that city stoned him. Yet this is also where Timothy heard Paul and became a Christian (Ac 16:1).

Once back at Antioch in 49 AD, some visitors from Jerusalem taught that the Gentiles must first convert to Judaism before they could become Christians (Ac 15:1). This elicited so much pushback from Paul and Barnabas that they were sent to Jerusalem to debate this issue with the Church Council in Jerusalem. Titus, a Greek, also accompanied them to Jerusalem. From what Paul told the Council about his and Barnabas’ experience in Asia Minor and Peter’s encounter with Cornelius, the Council realized that God was working mightily with the Gentiles and had them receive the Holy Spirit without having to become a Jewish proselyte first. The Council concluded that Gentiles did not need to be circumcised but should abstain from meat offered to idols or from strangled animals, from blood, and from sexual immorality (Ac 15:20, 23-29). They also recognized that Paul had been called by God to the Gentiles and Peter called to his Jewish brethren (Ga 2:7-9).

Barnabas had his nephew, John Mark, return to Antioch with them. When Paul got back to Antioch, he read them the letter and the people rejoiced in the support they were given. Apparently, several people from Jerusalem came and helped teach at this time. One was Peter himself, but Paul had to reprimand Peter publicly because he was showing favoritism toward the Jewish Christians over the Gentile Christians (Ga 2:14). It seems Peter, as well as many other Jews, had a hard time with being on equal spiritual footing with Gentiles. While he believed it, this did not make it any easier for him to implement. He became cliquish without even realizing he was doing so until it was pointed out to him.

This can be true for us as well. Often, we are cliquish by clinging to the familiar with Christian friends rather than reaching out to those who don’t know Christ. We need to understand that we are Christ’s ambassadors in this world (2Co 5:20). We are in the world but not of it (Jn 17:16). We are to be the promoters of Christ’s kingdom to those not yet of it and don’t even realize it is something to which they have access or even need (Ro 8:7).

This was likely near the time that the twelve apostles began their evangelistic ministry outside Jerusalem. Most of the disciples continued to minister to Jews with many going east into Parthia as there was a large Jewish contingent still there from the time of their original exile into Assyria and Babylon. Here is a brief description of what some Biblical texts and tradition states about the twelve disciples (most of this information is from McBirnie’s book Search for the Twelve Apostles):

Peter: became a pillar of the church in Jerusalem along with James, the half-brother of Jesus, and ministered to Jews in Babylon and in the northern part of what we today call Turkey.

Andrew: went to Scythia (land mainly between and just north of the Black and Caspian Seas) and ministered to the Jews there and possibly died a martyr’s death—possibly stoned and crucified. There are some who say that he later went to Asia Minor (today the country of Turkey) and spent time in Ephesus with John and later went to Greece where he won a Grecian governor’s wife to Christ which so angered the man that he had Andrew crucified in Patras.

James: was martyred early by King Agrippa I around 44 A.D. There are some who say that before this he traveled with Peter to India to preach to Jews who had been scattered there.

John: he moved to Ephesus prior to the destruction of Jerusalem and likely took Mary, the mother of Jesus with him. We know he opposed emperor worship which got him exiled to the isle of Patmos by emperor Domitian. After Domitian’s death, he was allowed to return to Ephesus where he died of natural causes.

Philip: went to Scythia and ministered to the Jews there for twenty years. It would seem fitting that he and Andrew would be there together as they had known each other since their time being disciples of John the Baptist. Later in his life, he apparently went to Phrygia (part of today’s Turkey) and died in Hierapolis, possibly a martyr’s death (stoning and crucifixion) due to him standing up against the city’s idolatry.

Bartholomew (Nathanael): He apparently went to parts of India for a time to preach Jesus to Jews found there. It seems he later went to Hierapolis to be with Philip. He apparently was arrested with Philip but for some reason was released. He arrived in Armenia (land between and just south of the Black and Caspian Seas) sometime later where he met a martyr’s death of crucifixion.

Thomas: he became a central figure of the apostolic movement eastward from Jerusalem and spent much time in Babylon and later ministered in parts of India establishing many churches along the way. He was martyred somewhere in India by being thrust through by a lance.

Matthew: There is much controversy as to what happened to Matthew. It is thought he went to Ethiopia. Yet, there were two: one in Africa and one in Parthia, just south of the Caspian Sea. Since there is a tradition that a copy of his gospel reached India, it would seem he likely ministered in Parthia rather than in Africa. There is also some who say he had many confrontations with the Sanhedrin in Alexandria, Egypt. Some say he died a natural death, and this may have occurred in Egypt.

James, the son of Alphaeus (James the Less, or James the Younger): he may have served as a leader in the Syrian church at Antioch and it is believed he was stoned by Jews for preaching Christ and was buried in Jerusalem.

Thaddaeus (Jude): It is thought he originally ministered in Syria living in Damascus and then in Armenia, likely with Barthalomew and Thomas for a time, and is thought to have been martyred when he returned to Syria by being killed by magicians who were enraged by the destruction of their idols using a halberd (type of hand-held axe) or club.

Simon the Zealot: It is thought he traveled to Egypt, through North Africa to Carthage, to Spain and then to Britain. He likely did not stay long in Britain but returned to Persia where he ministered with Thaddaeus in Syria and Mesopotamia. It is believed he was martyred by being sawn asunder.

Matthias: He was the one who replaced Judas Iscariot as one of the Twelve. It is believed he helped to evangelize Armenia and later ministered in Damascus in Syria and died in Phaleaon, a city in Judea, by stoning.

As we can see, Christ’s original eleven, and Matthias replacing Judas, mainly served their fellow Jews to try and win them over to Christ, although they did witness to many Gentiles in that process. They each remained faithful and never failed to be a true witness about their Lord and Savior even at the cost of their very lives.

Do we have the same drive and commitment. May we be that if the time ever comes to make such a drastic decision if and when adversity comes out way. Next time, we’ll look at adversity that followed Paul and how he worked through it. I hope you join me.

____________

Visit Books & Words to Inspire by Randy C. Dockens

We have seen that Paul was appointed by God as an Apostle to the Gentiles. So what caused so much controversy between Paul and the Christian Jews? Paul taught that circumcision was not necessary for salvation (Ac 15:1-2) and that Gentiles did not have to keep the Law to be a Christian (Ga 2:16). Many of the persecuted Jewish believers had fled to Antioch and other churches teaching that Gentiles must be circumcised and keep the Law of Moses in addition to accepting Jesus Christ as their Savior. In other words, you had to first be a Jewish proselyte to become a follower of Jesus Christ. Paul was opposed to this and went to the Jewish leaders in Jerusalem where they heard how God was blessing Gentiles and were receiving the Holy Spirit without being circumcised. This created quite an argument, but Peter also told how he had seen the Holy Spirit given to Gentile believers without them being circumcised (Ac 10, 15:7-11). From Peter’s statement, the Jerusalem council said they would be satisfied if the Gentile believers would not eat meat sacrificed to idols, not eat meat from strangled animals, not eat blood, and would keep themselves sexually pure (Ac 15:20). This Paul did (Ac 16:4).

So did Paul give up his Jewish customs? At times he did, for he did not want to be a stumbling block to others and confuse them (1Co 9:20-22); however, for the most part he kept a lot of the Jewish customs. On his second missionary journey, he hurried back to Jerusalem to keep Passover (Ac 18:21). On this journey he also seemed to have kept a Nazarite vow (Ac 18:18). On his third missionary journey, he observed the Feast of Unleavened Bread in Philippi (Ac 20:6) and wanted to get to Jerusalem in time for Shavuot [Pentecost] (Ac 20:16). Therefore, Paul did not live like a Gentile in every aspect. However, he was not bothered by blending the two.

So how do we reconcile this? Paul’s main emphasis was that Jesus Christ came and died for the sins of mankind and everyone needs to hear about him, accept him, receive salvation through him, and receive the Holy Spirit in order to live a life then pleasing to God. Everything else was just tradition. The Law of Moses had shown them their sin (Ro 3:20); keeping it did not save them (Ro 3:23, 28). Salvation through Jesus Christ is for all, both Jew and Gentile (Ro 3:21-31). Paul saw no problem with keeping the Jewish traditions/customs, or even the Law itself, as long as it was kept in its proper context. It is something one chooses volitionally to do but not committed to do. Therefore, there was no need to impose this on Gentiles as it was not necessary for salvation. However, anyone, either Jew or Gentile can decide to keep the Jewish feasts and any other customs if they know this is not making them any better than anyone else (1Co 8:8).

Paul’s teaching is a good lesson for us today. Our customs and heritage are especially important to us, as well as they should be. However, we should not let any custom or tradition make us feel superior to anyone else. We are all equal in Christ. Jesus Christ came to die for the salvation of all. It is our faith in him that saves us and that is the equalizer. All other things we do or do not do are based upon personal conviction and have no bearing on our goodness or righteousness. It is not how much faith we have but the object of our faith that makes the difference. Let’s let Paul’s example be our guide.

____________

Visit Books & Words to Inspire by Randy C. Dockens

What was Paul’s background? Paul was trained to be a Pharisee and he seemed to be top of his class (Ac 22:3; Pp 3:4-6). He was also a Roman citizen (Ac 22:27) which gave him special privileges. Peers would say he had it all—all that any Jew could ever hope for—wealth, special spiritual training, respect of their Jewish leaders and all the privileges that a Roman citizen could receive. Paul also had a zeal for doing God’s work—just misguided. No one else could see his potential, but it was truly clear to God.

So, why was Paul’s background so important? Well, let me ask you. If you were going to accomplish a paradigm shift: going from using a Jewish nation to individuals and not just Jewish individuals but Gentile individuals also, who would you want to help accomplish that? You would need someone who could understand Jewish law and how that now relates to the teachings of Christ. You would need someone that could stand up to criticism of this new paradigm and be able to defend it with Jewish scripture. You would need someone who could gain the respect of the Gentiles as well. What better person than Paul? He had special training in Jewish law. There was no one who could argue he did not know the Jewish Scriptures. He had originally hated the Christians, so he could identify with how the Gentiles must feel going from their current culture to becoming a Christian which would seem rather foreign at first. He would be able to tease out from Scripture what was necessary for the Gentiles and what was optional and was just Jewish tradition. He could tease out the meaning behind the Jewish traditions and not just feel the tradition, in itself, was sufficient. He could put Christ’s teachings into their proper Jewish scripture context and explain it in a way that would make sense to the Jew as well as to the Gentile. Yes, God needed someone like Paul. And Paul did not let God down. Yet, God had to be quite blunt with Paul and stop him dead in his tracks in order to get his attention (Ac 9:1-6). Once on the right road, however, there was no stopping him.

____________

Visit Books & Words to Inspire by Randy C. Dockens

So, how many apostles are there? It seems the number has always been reported as 12. Jesus had twelve disciples, but Judas betrayed him and committed suicide. Peter initiated a replacement and Matthias was chosen (Ac 1:12-26). Then, later, Paul states that God called him to be an apostle (Ac 9:15; Ro 1:1). So, are there 12, 13, or 14 apostles? Well, if we take at face value that the information in Revelation is speaking of the future, it seems to indicate there are only 12 (Rv 21:14). If this is true, how do we come to grips with this? Well, let’s go through this step by step.

The first question would be did Judas have faith in Jesus as the Messiah before he died? There are several things that would seem to indicate he did not. Several scriptures suggest Judas did not have faith in Christ’s reason for coming (Jn 17:12; Ps 41:9). This point is addressed more fully in my book, Why is a Gentile World Tied to a Jewish Timeline?. However, Peter, knowing the state of Judas, and knowing that scripture stated he should be replaced (Ac 1:20; Ps 109:8), likely felt Judas had not been a true follower of Christ, and is likely one of the reasons Peter was advocating a replacement for him. However, let’s look at the circumstances around this event. This was on the heels of the disciples seeing Christ ascend back into heaven. But let’s see what Christ told the disciples. Christ stated the disciples were to go to Jerusalem and wait for the Holy Spirit (Ac 1:4, 8). Peter, as his previous actions imply, was not a patient person. He was a man of action—sometimes to his detriment. Yet, he was definitely a leader. Perhaps because there was not a specific time given to them and knowing that the Feast of Pentecost (Weeks or Shavuot) was fast approaching, which would bring a lot of activity, Peter may have felt they should be doing something. However, if Jesus had wanted the disciples to choose another disciple at this time, it is likely he would have given that request before his ascension or even chosen another before his ascension. Remember, Christ’s request was for them to wait. Waiting usually implies just that—to wait.

The other thing to look at is how the decision was made. They used lots (Ac 1:26). This is similar to flipping a coin and making a decision as to whether it lands heads or tails. Now, granted, this was not something unusual. The casting of lots was a customary thing to do to know if a decision was of the gods or not (Jh 1:7). However, for the Jews, this was usually done by the High Priest (using Urim and Thummim; Nu 27:21) because they were expecting an answer from the One True God. Sometimes lots were cast (Nu 26:55) and God was expected to be in the correct decision of the lot. Therefore, Peter most likely thought this was an acceptable way of making the decision. After all, they did pray before casting the lot. However, the way this was done, a decision would be made whether God was in the decision or not. Two candidates (Justus and Mathias) were chosen, and the lot was to choose which one would become the replacement for Judas. Once the Holy Spirit came to indwell each believer, the need for lots was no longer required as the Holy Spirit could minister and impress upon one’s human spirit the right course of action. Maybe this was why Jesus asked the disciples to wait for the Holy Spirit? I am sure both of these men were very good men, or the disciples would not have put them up for nomination. It is interesting that scripture does not mention Mathias again after this selection process. Could this be a silent statement of scripture that this was not really God’s plan? Did the disciples know their error after the Holy Spirit came to indwell them? Again, scripture is silent. However, if Paul was indeed called to be an apostle, as he claimed (see 30-Jan-2013 post), then Paul would complete the 12, and not Matthias. It seem obedience is always the best choice.

A caveat here, though. The Bible does not condemn Peter for his actions, so we can’t know for sure if this was indeed rash on his part or not. As they say, time will tell. Or, in this case, eternity. There does seem to be historical evidence that Matthias was just as dedicated to the spreading of the gospel as any of the other apostles and met a martyr’s death as did almost every apostle.

____________

Visit Books & Words to Inspire by Randy C. Dockens

Paul definitely claimed to be an apostle (Ro 11:13; 1Co 9:1; 2Co 12:12; Gal 2:8; 1Tm 2:7; Tt 1:1) and even claimed his appointment as an apostle was given by God (Ro 1:1; 1Co 1:1; 2Co 1:1; Ga 1:1; Ep 1:1; Cl 1:1; 1Tm 1:1). So was there any proof of this being true? There were two things that usually defined an apostle: (1) being an eye witness to Jesus Christ and (2) being able to do signs, wonders and miracles (2Co 12:12).

Paul was born under the name Saul in the city of Tarsus, Cilicia (which is now part of Turkey) around 3 to 5 AD. Therefore, by the time Jesus was crucified, Paul would have been around 30 years of age. Since Paul was taught by Gamaliel (Ac 22:3), who was a key figure in the Sanhedrin in the middle of the first century and the grandson of the great Jewish teach Hillel the Elder, it is likely Paul would have met Jesus during his lifetime since he would have been in Jerusalem during the time of Jesus’ ministry. Yet, he would likely have been opposed to the teachings of Jesus like many of the other Pharisees would have been. Therefore, he would not have had an intimate relationship with Jesus and his teachings—at least not until Jesus met him on the road to Damascus (Ac 9:1-9). It really shows how Paul had the zeal to serve God, but his zeal was just misguided. After he understood that Jesus was indeed Lord, he had the same zeal to serve Jesus Christ as he did previously to stamp out those proclaiming to be Christians. This wasn’t the only experience with Jesus Christ, though. We find that he had a vision where he was translated into the third heaven and heard inexpressible things (2Co 12:4). This was an experience not held by any other apostle. This likely occurred not too long after his conversion—maybe when he spent his time in Arabia (Ga 1:17). This is also likely when God revealed to him the mystery of the church and how the Gentiles will be heirs with Israel (Ep 3:4-11; Cl 1:25-17), and how the rapture will occur before Christ’s second coming (1Co 15:51-52; 1Th 4:13-18). Do these events not qualify him for the first criterion of being an apostle?

Miracles were usually characteristics of an apostle. One could point out that Stephen, who was a deacon, also performed miracles (Ac 6:8). Yet, as the church grew, the people capable of miracles remained mainly around those characterized as apostles (2Co 12:12). There were many miracles that were accomplished by Paul: he told Elymas that he would become blind for a season, and he did (Ac 13:9-11); he performed signs and wonders in Iconium (Ac 14:3); he healed a crippled man in Lystra (Ac 14:8); he healed a demon possessed girl in Philippi (Ac 16:18); he performed extraordinary miracles in Ephesus where people were healed with handkerchiefs that had touched him (Ac 19:11-12); he brought Eutychus back to life in Troas (Ac 20:9-10), and even though bitten by a poisonous viper, he had no ill effect from it (Ac 28:3-6).

Based upon these criteria, it would seem Paul would meet the criteria for being called an apostle. So what about Matthias who was chosen by Peter and the disciples shortly after Christ’s ascension (Ac 1:12-26)? And what about Judas? Do we have 12, 13 or 14 apostles? We will discuss this next time.

____________

Visit Books & Words to Inspire by Randy C. Dockens