The Names of the Apostles

  • Thread starter Thread starter patrick457
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
P

patrick457

Guest
Oh yes, another thread of mine which was built for personal enjoyment and probably wouldn’t get any replies (as most of my threads are wont to be; do I get an award?) 😃 Here, we look at the names of the Apostles as they appear in all four Gospels.

It’s pretty much well-known that Jesus had twelve Apostles. A few members of the Twelve are even major characters throughout the whole New Testament, and thus get to be mentioned a number of times (Simon Peter is a prime example of this); by contrast, the others never do anything of great importance to the story - in fact they are so minor that the only reason why we know their names is because the Evangelists cared to list them.

Which brings us to the list of the Twelve in the Synoptics. We would give it here in the traditional order (Matthew-Mark-Luke).

Matthew (10:1-4)

Simon who is called Peter
Andrew his brother
James of Zebedee
John his brother
Philip
Bartholomew
Thomas
Matthew the tax-gatherer
James of Alphaeus
Thaddaeus (also Lebbaeus, depending on which textual tradition you read; some even conflate the two names as “Lebbaeus called Thaddaeus” or vice versa)
Simon the Cananaean
Judas Iscariot, who also handed him over

Mark (3:13-18)

Simon to whom he gave the name Peter
James of Zebedee
John the brother of James
Andrew
Philip
Bartholomew
Matthew
Thomas
James of Alphaeus
Thaddaeus
Simon the Cananaean
Judas Iscariot, who handed him over

Luke (6:12-16)

Simon whom he named Peter
Andrew his brother
James
John
Philip
Bartholomew
Matthew
Thomas
James the son of Alphaeus
Simon who was called the Zealot/Zealous
Judas of James
Judas Iscariot, who became a traitor

We note the following characteristics:

  1. *]Simon Peter is always named first.
    *]Judas Iscariot is always placed last; to his name is tagged a note about his future handing over of Jesus to the authorities.
    *]The first four disciples named are always the same, though the Evangelists never agree on the order (Mark: Simon-James-John-Andrew; Matthew, Luke: Simon-Andrew-James-John)
    *]Always following the first four disciples are Philip, Bartholomew, Matthew, Thomas, and James son of Alphaeus. Mark and Luke list Matthew’s and Thomas’ names in that order, while Matthew places Thomas’ name first.
    *]All three agree in naming another Simon aside from Peter. Matthew and Mark give him the title “the Cananaean” while Luke gives “Zealot” (or “Zealous”)
    *]Mark names a Thaddaeus, which many manuscripts of Matthew follow. Other manuscripts of Matthew (and even a few of Mark), meanwhile, name this Apostle as Lebbaeus. Still others conflate the two readings, or just leave the name out wholesale. Luke, meanwhile, names a Judas of James. (On the other hand, some Vetus Latina manuscripts of Matthew has the name Iudas Zelotes, “Judas the Zealot/Zealous” here)
 
We now go to the Gospel of John. Unlike the Synoptics, John does not offer a formal list of apostles, though it refers to “the Twelve” in a single scene (6:67-71). However, John does not present any elaboration about what “the Twelve” actually was, which makes the scene at the end of the chapter 6 appear rather suspiciously disjointed with the rest of the narrative. There is also no distinction between ‘apostles’ and ‘disciples’ in the Gospel; in fact, the term apostles are absent.

All in all, only the following disciples are named in John’s Gospel:

Peter
Andrew the brother of Peter
The sons of Zebedee (21:2)
Philip (1:44-46, 48; 6:5, 7; 12:21-22; 14:8-9)
Nathanael (1:43, 45-49; 21:2)
Thomas called Didymus (11:16; 20:24; 21:2)
Judas the son of Simon Iscariot (6:71; 12:4; 13:2, 26; 14:22; 18:2-3, 5)
Judas not Iscariot (14:22)

In addition to this, mention is made of “two others of his disciples” in 21:2. If these two are Apostles, this would bring the total up to eleven. There are also mentions of the “beloved disciple” (13:23-25; 19:26-27; 20:1-10; 21:1-25) and the “other disciple” (1:35-40; 18:15-16). Tradition has identified the beloved disciple, the ‘other disciple’, and John son of Zebedee to be one and the same person.

Here are the other elements:


  1. *]To Judas Iscariot’s name is also appended references to his handing over Jesus, as in the Synoptics.
    *]Philip appears more prominently in John’s Gospel than in the Synoptics.
    *]Thomas, who appears only by name in the Synoptics, is like Philip given a personality and a more larger role in the story.
    *]Out of these disciples, only Nathanael is not present in the lists in the other gospels, and then, he is mentioned by name only at the beginning (when he is called by Jesus) and at the end (when he goes fishing with other disciples).
    *]The sons of Zebedee are only explicitly named once (though see the beloved disciple/other disciple) above.
    *]James son of Alphaeus, Matthew, and Simon the Canaanite/Zealot are not named in John.
 
Here’s a comment, or a question, rather. What do you think of the theory that the “Judas, not the Iscariot” in John is another name for Thomas/Didymus, perhaps his true, given name, rather than the other Judas mentioned in Luke (the “Thaddeus” of Matthew and Mark, presumably)? Could there have been three Judases among the Twelve, hence a need for other names and such to differentiate them (Thomas or Didymus both of which mean “twin”, Thaddeus meaning something like “close friend”, and the Iscariot)?
 
It makes sense that the youngest Apostle, the Benjamin of the group, would have different friends and a different viewpoint from the others.
 
patrick457 said:
Oh yes, another thread of mine which was built for personal enjoyment and probably wouldn’t get any replies (as most of my threads are wont to be; do I get an award?) 😃 Here, we look at the names of the Apostles as they appear in all four Gospels.

It’s pretty much well-known that Jesus had twelve Apostles. A few members of the Twelve are even major characters throughout the whole New Testament, and thus get to be mentioned a number of times (Simon Peter is a prime example of this); by contrast, the others never do anything of great importance to the story - in fact they are so minor that the only reason why we know their names is because the Evangelists cared to list them.

Which brings us to the list of the Twelve in the Synoptics. We would give it here in the traditional order (Matthew-Mark-Luke).

Matthew (10:1-4)

Simon who is called Peter
Andrew his brother
James of Zebedee
John his brother
Philip
Bartholomew
Thomas
Matthew the tax-gatherer
James of Alphaeus
Thaddaeus (also Lebbaeus, depending on which textual tradition you read; some even conflate the two names as “Lebbaeus called Thaddaeus” or vice versa)
Simon the Cananaean
Judas Iscariot, who also handed him over

Mark (3:13-18)

Simon to whom he gave the name Peter
James of Zebedee
John the brother of James
Andrew
Philip
Bartholomew
Matthew
Thomas
James of Alphaeus
Thaddaeus
Simon the Cananaean
Judas Iscariot, who handed him over

Luke (6:12-16)

Simon whom he named Peter
Andrew his brother
James
John
Philip
Bartholomew
Matthew
Thomas
James the son of Alphaeus
Simon who was called the Zealot/Zealous
Judas of James
Judas Iscariot, who became a traitor

We note the following characteristics:

  1. *]Simon Peter is always named first.
    *]Judas Iscariot is always placed last; to his name is tagged a note about his future handing over of Jesus to the authorities.
    *]The first four disciples named are always the same, though the Evangelists never agree on the order (Mark: Simon-James-John-Andrew; Matthew, Luke: Simon-Andrew-James-John)
    *]Always following the first four disciples are Philip, Bartholomew, Matthew, Thomas, and James son of Alphaeus. Mark and Luke list Matthew’s and Thomas’ names in that order, while Matthew places Thomas’ name first.
    *]All three agree in naming another Simon aside from Peter. Matthew and Mark give him the title “the Cananaean” while Luke gives “Zealot” (or “Zealous”)
    *]Mark names a Thaddaeus, which many manuscripts of Matthew follow. Other manuscripts of Matthew (and even a few of Mark), meanwhile, name this Apostle as Lebbaeus. Still others conflate the two readings, or just leave the name out wholesale. Luke, meanwhile, names a Judas of James. (On the other hand, some Vetus Latina manuscripts of Matthew has the name Iudas Zelotes, “Judas the Zealot/Zealous” here)
Click to expand...

  1. Acts 1:13
    Peter.
    John.
    James.
    Andrew.

    Philip.
    Thomas.
    Bartholomew.
    Matthew.

    James son of Alphaeus.
    Simon the zealot.
    Jude son of James.

    Somewhat different order than Lk but Peter is still first and the first four are the same. Judas was voted off the island.
 
Aelred_Minor said:
Here’s a comment, or a question, rather. What do you think of the theory that the “Judas, not the Iscariot” in John is another name for Thomas/Didymus, perhaps his true, given name, rather than the other Judas mentioned in Luke (the “Thaddeus” of Matthew and Mark, presumably)? Could there have been three Judases among the Twelve, hence a need for other names and such to differentiate them (Thomas or Didymus both of which mean “twin”, Thaddeus meaning something like “close friend”, and the Iscariot)?
Click to expand...
There’s nothing to prove or disprove this idea, IMHO, since Yehudah (whence came our Judah/Judas/Jude) is a common name in the 1st century. Could be possible, but we don’t know for sure. The theory that Thomas’ name was Judas actually comes, it seems, from the Gospel of Thomas, which begins: “These are the secret sayings which the living Jesus spoke and Didymus Judas Thomas recorded.”

For the record, Thaddaeus is actually thought to be derived from Aramaic taddā ‘breast’. This is theorized to be a nickname for a close friend, as in ‘bosom buddy’, or a younger brother.
 
We now go off from the New Testament and delve into other Early Christian literature.

The Epistula Apostolorum is an apocryphal work thought to date from the mid-2nd century, purporting to be a letter written by the apostles from the period immediately after Jesus’ resurrection. Its content heavily criticises gnosticism, although it does so not so much as a polemic against it, as an attempt to shore up the faith of non-gnostics. In particular the text uses the style of a discourse and series of questions with a vision of Jesus that was popular amongst gnostic groups, so as to appeal to the same readers. However, its difference with gnostic literature is that the text is at pains to point out that it is not a secret teaching, that the content applies universally rather than to one group, and that everyone can easily come to learn its content, strongly differing with the esoteric mysteries inherent in Gnosticism.

The letter begins by listing the names of the senders:

John
Thomas
Peter
Andrew
James
Philip
Bartholomew
Matthew
Nathanael
Judas the Zealot
Cephas

Here are a few things unique to this listing:

  1. *]Only eleven disciples are named, as the letter is ostensibly written after the Resurrection (one would notice the absence of Judas Iscariot).
    *]John is named first among the Eleven.
    *]It distinguishes between Peter and Cephas. Similarly, Bartholomew (from the Synoptics) and Nathanael (from John) are are also distinguished from one another, in contrast to another tradition which considers the two as one and the same.
    *]There is only one James.
    *]The name ‘Judas the Zealot’ (attested in some Vetus Latina manuscripts of Matthew, as we’ve mentioned) crops up here.
    *]James of Alphaeus, Thaddaeus, and Simon the Cananaean/Zealot from the Synoptic lists are absent.
 
Ok, thank you.
By the way, I haven’t found all the first names with the name Jesus gave them yet, but here are the three I found.

Simon Peter
Levi Matthew
Nathanael Bartholomew
 
White_Peony said:
Ok, thank you.
By the way, I haven’t found all the first names with the name Jesus gave them yet, but here are the three I found.

Simon Peter
Levi Matthew
Nathanael Bartholomew
Click to expand...
One theory I’ve heard is that Matthew, as a tax collector, had been disinherited and cast out of the family by his father, Alphaeus, and so was no longer entitled to use the name “Levi” given him at his circumcision.

However, Matthew got revenge of a sort: when he listed the Twelve, he switched Matthew and Thomas to reunite himself with his brother, James son of Alphaeus.
 
White_Peony said:
Ok, thank you.
By the way, I haven’t found all the first names with the name Jesus gave them yet, but here are the three I found.

Simon Peter
Levi Matthew
Nathanael Bartholomew
Click to expand...
The Gospels do record explicitly that Jesus gave Simon the name ‘Peter’, but the latter two are actually only inferred. Take for instance the identification of Levi with Matthew: it stems from the fact that the tax collector whom Jesus calls in the Gospels is named “Levi” in Mark (2:13-17; he adds that Levi is a ‘son of Alphaeus’) and Luke (5:27-31), while Matthew names him simply “Matthew” (9:9-13). Which is quite interesting, as all three Gospels do not include someone named Levi among the Twelve, instead they agree in naming a Matthew. So most people pretty much assumed that Matthew and Levi are one and the same, though there have been a few folks who disagreed with this in the Church’s history: [Didymus the Blind]((Commentary on the Psalms, 184, 9-10)), for instance, invoking the authority of the elusive Gospel of the Hebrews, identifies Levi with Matthias (Commentary on the Psalms, 184, 9-10). That being said, one should note that the names Matthew (Maththaios/Matthaios) and Matthias (Matthias) share the same origin: the Hebrew Matityahu (or the shorter form Mattai)! 😃

Bartholomew is a more tricky case, as the name only appears in the Synoptics; by contrast, the name Nathanael is found only in John. The identification of the two seems to stem from the fact that in the Synoptic lists, Bartholomew is always paired with Philip; one should note that in John, it was actually Philip who introduces Nathanael to Jesus. Bartholomaios is actually a transliteration of an Aramaic patronymic (Bar-Tolmai, ‘son of Tolmai’ or even ‘son of [the] furrows’), so if Nathanael and Bartholomew are one and the same person, it could be that his given name is actually ‘Nathanael’ while ‘Bartholomew’ is a patronymic or a nickname.
 
patrick457 said:
Oh yes, another thread of mine which was built for personal enjoyment and probably wouldn’t get any replies (as most of my threads are wont to be; do I get an award?) 😃 Here, we look at the names of the Apostles as they appear in all four Gospels.

It’s pretty much well-known that Jesus had twelve Apostles. A few members of the Twelve are even major characters throughout the whole New Testament, and thus get to be mentioned a number of times (Simon Peter is a prime example of this); by contrast, the others never do anything of great importance to the story - in fact they are so minor that the only reason why we know their names is because the Evangelists cared to list them.

Which brings us to the list of the Twelve in the Synoptics. We would give it here in the traditional order (Matthew-Mark-Luke).

Matthew (10:1-4)

Simon who is called Peter
Andrew his brother
James of Zebedee
John his brother
Philip
Bartholomew
Thomas
Matthew the tax-gatherer
James of Alphaeus
Thaddaeus (also Lebbaeus, depending on which textual tradition you read; some even conflate the two names as “Lebbaeus called Thaddaeus” or vice versa)
Simon the Cananaean
Judas Iscariot, who also handed him over

Mark (3:13-18)

Simon to whom he gave the name Peter
James of Zebedee
John the brother of James
Andrew
Philip
Bartholomew
Matthew
Thomas
James of Alphaeus
Thaddaeus
Simon the Cananaean
Judas Iscariot, who handed him over

Luke (6:12-16)

Simon whom he named Peter
Andrew his brother
James
John
Philip
Bartholomew
Matthew
Thomas
James the son of Alphaeus
Simon who was called the Zealot/Zealous
Judas of James
Judas Iscariot, who became a traitor

We note the following characteristics:

  1. *]Simon Peter is always named first.
    *]Judas Iscariot is always placed last; to his name is tagged a note about his future handing over of Jesus to the authorities.
    *]The first four disciples named are always the same, though the Evangelists never agree on the order (Mark: Simon-James-John-Andrew; Matthew, Luke: Simon-Andrew-James-John)
    *]Always following the first four disciples are Philip, Bartholomew, Matthew, Thomas, and James son of Alphaeus. Mark and Luke list Matthew’s and Thomas’ names in that order, while Matthew places Thomas’ name first.
    *]All three agree in naming another Simon aside from Peter. Matthew and Mark give him the title “the Cananaean” while Luke gives “Zealot” (or “Zealous”)
    *]Mark names a Thaddaeus, which many manuscripts of Matthew follow. Other manuscripts of Matthew (and even a few of Mark), meanwhile, name this Apostle as Lebbaeus. Still others conflate the two readings, or just leave the name out wholesale. Luke, meanwhile, names a Judas of James. (On the other hand, some Vetus Latina manuscripts of Matthew has the name Iudas Zelotes, “Judas the Zealot/Zealous” here)
Click to expand...

  1. …seems you got one reply!

    …if you desire a greater engagement, perhaps you should start future threads with a query instead of the reply/ies; I found it difficult to engage since I limit myself to Sacred Scriptures (lazy is not a sufficient adjective) and you’ve cornered the topic (I found only one angle… but it was based on your personal observation rather than on the subject matter) as far as Biblical text is concerned; there are topics that I think could be well developed (unless you’re only interested in those that are of personal interest to you) with your systematic approach.

    Let me know if you would like me to throw some topics at you; just to peek your interest: What happened to the Thirteenth Tribe?

    Maran atha!

    Angel
 
patrick457 said:
There’s nothing to prove or disprove this idea, IMHO, since Yehudah (whence came our Judah/Judas/Jude) is a common name in the 1st century. Could be possible, but we don’t know for sure. The theory that Thomas’ name was Judas actually comes, it seems, from the Gospel of Thomas, which begins: “These are the secret sayings which the living Jesus spoke and Didymus Judas Thomas recorded.”

For the record, Thaddaeus is actually thought to be derived from Aramaic taddā ‘breast’. This is theorized to be a nickname for a close friend, as in ‘bosom buddy’, or a younger brother.
Click to expand...
Why was Thomas called “Twin”? Whose twin was he?
 
CHRISTINE77 said:
Why was Thomas called “Twin”? Whose twin was he?
Click to expand...
It’s hard to say, since the Gospels never tell us. Now there were some folks, usually Gnostics, who seemed to be of the opinion that Jesus was, in some way, Thomas’ twin brother, but this identification may have been driven more by theological grounds: Thomas is given as a model of self-understanding. (Though there have been some rather far-fetched recent theories which attempt to explain this tradition, such as that Thomas’ personal name was ‘Jesus’ or even that Thomas looked a lot like Him!)

The Savior said, "Brother Thomas while you have time in the world, listen to me, and I will reveal to you the things you have pondered in your mind.

“Now, since it has been said that you are my twin and true companion, examine yourself, and learn who you are, in what way you exist, and how you will come to be. Since you will be called my brother, it is not fitting that you be ignorant of yourself. And I know that you have understood, because you had already understood that I am the knowledge of the truth. So while you accompany me, although you are uncomprehending, you have (in fact) already come to know, and you will be called ‘the one who knows himself’. For he who has not known himself has known nothing, but he who has known himself has at the same time already achieved knowledge about the depth of the all. So then, you, my brother Thomas, have beheld what is obscure to men, that is, what they ignorantly stumble against.”
  • The Book of Thomas the Contender
Oh, and I have an expansion to make:

The tradition which gives Thomas’ name as ‘Judas’ actually seems to have been strong in Edessa and surrounding regions: in fact, aside from the Gospel of Thomas, it can also be found in many other early literature which may have their roots in East Syria, such as the Acts of Thomas, Book of Thomas the Contender, the Doctrine of Addai, and the Curetonian Gospels (in John 14:22). St. Ephraem, who himself eventually settled in Edessa when the Christian population of his native town Nisibis was expelled due to it coming under Persian control, also seems to be aware of this tradition, and Eusebius, who quotes the legend of King Abgar, also refers to “Judas, who was also called Thomas” (Church History 1.13.11).
 
patrick457 said:
It’s hard to say, since the Gospels never tell us. Now there were some folks, usually Gnostics, who seemed to be of the opinion that Jesus was, in some way, Thomas’ twin brother, but this identification may have been driven more by theological grounds: Thomas is given as a model of self-understanding. (Though there have been some rather far-fetched recent theories which attempt to explain this tradition, such as that Thomas’ personal name was ‘Jesus’ or even that Thomas looked a lot like Him!)

The Savior said, "Brother Thomas while you have time in the world, listen to me, and I will reveal to you the things you have pondered in your mind.

“Now, since it has been said that you are my twin and true companion, examine yourself, and learn who you are, in what way you exist, and how you will come to be. Since you will be called my brother, it is not fitting that you be ignorant of yourself. And I know that you have understood, because you had already understood that I am the knowledge of the truth. So while you accompany me, although you are uncomprehending, you have (in fact) already come to know, and you will be called ‘the one who knows himself’. For he who has not known himself has known nothing, but he who has known himself has at the same time already achieved knowledge about the depth of the all. So then, you, my brother Thomas, have beheld what is obscure to men, that is, what they ignorantly stumble against.”
  • The Book of Thomas the Contender
Oh, and I have an expansion to make:

The tradition which gives Thomas’ name as ‘Judas’ actually seems to have been strong in Edessa and surrounding regions: in fact, aside from the Gospel of Thomas, it can also be found in many other early literature which may have their roots in East Syria, such as the Acts of Thomas, Book of Thomas the Contender, the Doctrine of Addai, and the Curetonian Gospels (in John 14:22). St. Ephraem, who himself eventually settled in Edessa when the Christian population of his native town Nisibis was expelled due to it coming under Persian control, also seems to be aware of this tradition, and Eusebius, who quotes the legend of King Abgar, also refers to “Judas, who was also called Thomas” (Church History 1.13.11).
Click to expand...
At one time I thought perhaps the Apostles represented the twelve zodiac signs, so I thought Thomas was the Gemini. It’s pretty far fetched though!
 
CHRISTINE77 said:
At one time I thought perhaps the Apostles represented the twelve zodiac signs, so I thought Thomas was the Gemini. It’s pretty far fetched though!
Click to expand...
…specially when such practices (divination, spiritualism, magic…) has been deemed contrary to Yahweh God’s Holy Spirit.

Maran atha!

Angel
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top