No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
The Apostles in the New Testament and in the Ecclesiastical Tradition of Egypt
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 October 2011
Extract
There are four lists of the Apostles in the New Testament—one in each of the Synoptic Gospels containing the names of the Twelve, and one in the Book of Acts giving those of the Eleven only. Each list differs from the others in some respects.
Peter naturally stands first in each of the New Testament lists, and Judas Iscariot comes last when he is mentioned at all. The one occupies the position of honor at the head of the series; the other is named at the end on account of his treachery. The two sons of Zebedee, with Andrew and Philip, all being prominent members of the apostolic company and early disciples of Jesus, form together with Peter the first five in each of these lists. Below this point there is considerable difference in order and some variation in the names of the Apostles.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © President and Fellows of Harvard College 1928
References
1 Mark 3, 16–19; Matt. 10, 2–4; Luke 6, 14–16; Acts 1, 13.
2 Mark 1, 16 ff. = Matt. 4, 18 ff.; John 1, 44.
3 B. Weiss assigns Luke 6, 14–16 to L (Texte und Untersuchungen, Dritte Reihe, vol. II, 3, p. 110), and Streeter thinks that these verses were part of Proto-Luke (The Four Gospels, p. 222). On the other hand, J. Weiss believes that Luke is based on Mark at this point (Die Schriften des Neuen Testaments, 2nd ed., I, p. 443).
4 Mark 6, 7.
5 Cf. Pirqe Aboth i. 4 ff.
6 Cf. Eusebius, H. E. i. 12, 2. Clement expressed this opinion in the fifth book of his Hypotyposes. See also Casaubon in Critici Sacri, VII, col. 3309; Cornelius à Lapide on Gal. 2, 11; Hilgenfeld, Novum Testamentum extra Canonem Receptum, IV, p. 105; Harnack, Die Chronologie der altchristlichen Litteratur, II, p. 486; and Lake in the Harvard Theological Review, XIV, p. 96.
7 See also 1 Cor. 9, 5.
8 In the prologue to his commentary on Galatians Jerome writes thus (Migne, P. L. 26, col. 333): “Scripsit enim ille vir in epistolam Pauli ad Galatas quinque proprie volumina [commentaries], et decimum Stromatum suorum librum commatico super explanatione eius sermone complevit: tractatus [homilies] quoque varios et excerpta [notes], quae vel sola possint sufficere, composuit.” The list of Origen's works given in Jerome's Ep. xxxiii ad Paulam mentions a commentary in 15 books and 7 homilies on Galatians. See Klostermann's critical text in Sitzungsberichte, Berlin Academy, 1897, pp. 865 and 869. But a tenth-century MS. of the Acts and Epistles at Mt. Athos (Laura 184 B 64 = Gregory 1739), in which the commentary of Origen on Galatians is divided into five books (cf. von der Goltz in Texte und Untersuchungen, Neue Folge, vol. II, 4, pp. 72 f.) confirms Jerome's statement in his prologue as to the number of books in the commentary.
9 See Turner in Hastings's Diet, of the Bible, extra vol., p. 493.
10 I have consulted all the extant commentaries on Galatians mentioned by Dr. Turner in his most useful article on “Greek Patristic Commentaries on the Pauline Epistles” in Hastings, extra vol., pp. 484–581, but have found no trace of this view in any of them.
11 Migne, P. G. 118, col. 1112. There has been transmitted under the name of Oecumenius not only the genuine exegetical work of this writer, but also much additional matter of later date. Oecumenius lived in the sixth century, and the compilation which bears his name was made in the ninth. It contains the commentary of Photius on the Pauline epistles. Cf. Staab, Die Pauluskatenen, pp. 270 and 273 f.
12 Migne, P. G. 124, col. 977.
13 Migne, P. G. 51, col. 383 ff. The person who was censured is described as ἕτερός τις εὐτελὴς καὶ ἀπερριμμἐνος καὶ τῶν πολλῶν εἷς. According to the editions both of Montfaucon and of Savile, Chrysostom read Πέτρος, not Κηϕᾶς, in Gal. 2, 11.
14 Cf. Isho'dad, Comm. (ed. Gibson in Horae Semiticae, xi, vol. V, pt. i, p. 89, ll.12ff.; Eng. transl., xi, vol. V, pt. ii, p. 59).
15 Deburithâ 49 (ed. Budge in Anecdota Oxoniensia, Semitic Series, I, pt. ii, p. 128, ll. 8f.; Eng. transl., p. 113).
16 Ibid. 48 (ed. Budge, p. 125, ll. 3 f.; Eng. transl., p. 110).
17 The Peshitta reads ‘Cephas’ in Gal. 2, 11.
18 Cf. Ps.- Dorotheus of Tyre in Chronicon Paschale (ed. Dindorf in Corpus Scriptorum Historiae Byzantinae), II, p. 126. The Σύγγραμμα ἐκκλησιαστικὸν περὶ τῶν ο´ μαθητῶν τοῦ κυρίου, which is attributed to Dorotheus of Tyre, is a late Byzantine work.
19 Adv. Marc. v. 3. See also Adv. Marc. i. 20 and De praescript. haeret. 23.
20 I have examined, besides Jerome, the commentaries of Victorinus, ‘Ambrosiaster,’ Augustine, and Pelagius.
21 In Gal. 2,11 (Migne.P. L. 26, col. 365 ff.). His words are: “Alterius nescio cuius Cephae nescire nos nomen nisi eius qui et in evangelio, et in aliis Pauli epistolis, et in hac quoque ipsa modo Cephas, modo Petrus, scribitur.”
22 Cf. Souter, The Earliest Latin Commentaries on the Epistles of St. Paul, pp. 105 f.
23 Souter, pp. 147 ff.
24 Souter, pp. 213 ff.
25 Cf. Migne, P. L. 76, col. 1003. It is worthy of note that Gregory read ‘Petrus’ and not ‘Cephas’ in Gal. 2, 11.
26 The Sahidic text was discovered by Carl Schmidt in 1895. It is contained in a papyrus of the 4th or 5th century which is at the Mission Archéologique Française in Cairo. The text, with a German translation, appeared in 1910 (Texte und Untersuchungen, Dritte Reihe, XIII). Guerrier published the Ethiopic version, with a French translation, in 1913, chiefly on the basis of a manuscript in the British Museum (Or. 793), which was written in the middle of the 18th century (Patrologia Orientalis, IX, 3). The scanty remains of a Latin version were recognized by Bick in a palimpsest now in Vienna but formerly of Bobbio (Codex Palatinus Vindobonensis 16), which is of the 5th or 6th century (Sitzungsberichte, Vienna Academy, 159, Abteil. 7).
27 Texte und Untersuchungen, Dritte Reihe, XIII, pp. 361 ff.
28 Bardy in Revue Biblique, 1921, pp. 130 f.; and Vitti in Verbum Domini, III, p. 373.
29 Epist. Apost. 17. According to the Coptic text 120 years were to elapse before the parousia. This would make A.D. 150 the terminus ante quem for the composition of the Epistula Apostolorum. But the Ethiopic version has 150 years, and this number seems more likely to be right. Cf. Schmidt, pp. 397 f. The Latin translation is preserved at this point, but unfortunately the numeral is illegible. Bardy (pp. 131 f.) grants that the document may have been written in the second century, but on general grounds prefers to place it in the third.
30 For the identification of Nathanael and Bartholomew see Meyer's Commentary on John 1, 46. Most commentators adopt this view, but they do not refer to any ancient writers who held it. It is, however, found in some Syriac works. Cf. Isho'dad, Comm. (ed. Gibson in Horae Semiticae, VII, p. 128,1. 2); Solomon of Bâşrâ, Deburithâ 60 (ed. Budge, p. 130, ll. 5 f.); and Bar-Salîbî, Comm. in Evangelia (in Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium, Scriptores Syri, Series secunda, tom, xcviii, fasc. 2, p. 282, 1. 20). In the Menaea of the Greek Church Nathanael is said to be the same as Simon Zelotes of Cana in Galilee. Cf. Cornelius à Lapide on John 1, 45. This identification is based on the fact that Cana was the home of Nathanael (John 21, 2) and that Simon is called ὁ Καναναῖος (which was understood to mean ‘of Cana’) in Mark 3, 18 and Matthew 10, 4. Hilgenfeld formerly regarded Nathanael as identical with Matthew (Das Evangelium und die Briefe Johannis, pp. 271 f.), but later he identified him with Matthias (Novum Testamentum extra Canonem Beceptum, IV, p. 105).
31 John 1, 43.
32 Mark 3, 16; Matt. 10, 2; 16, 17 f.; Luke 6, 14; John 1, 42.
33 Acts 8, 9 ff.
34 Epist. Apost. 7. This passage is preserved in the Sahidic as well as in the Ethiopic text.
35 Harnack, Chronologic II, pp. 485 f. See also Texte und Untersuchungen, II, 1 and 2, pp. 218 ff.
36 For the Greek text see Hilgenfeld, Novum Testamentum extra Canonem Receptum, IV, pp. 95 ff.; and Harnack in Texte und Untersuchungen, II, 1 and 2, pp. 225 3. The Syriac version has been published by Arendzen in the Journal of Theological Studies, III, pp. 59 ff., and the Bohairic by Tattam (The Apostolical Constitutions, London, 1848). The Sahidic translation was edited by Lagarde in Aegyptiaca (Göttingen, 1883), pp. 239 ff. The Ethiopic and Arabic versions can be found in Horner, , The Statutes of the Apostles (London, 1904), pp. 1Google Scholar ff. and 89 ff.
37 Hauler, Didascaliae Apostolorum Fragments Veronensia Latina (Leipzig, 1900), I, pp. 92 ff. The prooemion, which contains the list of the Apostles, is not preserved in Latin.
38 Comm. in symb. apost. 38. Jerome also mentions a ‘Iudicium’ among the writings ascribed to Peter (De viris ill. 1). Eusebius, however, says nothing about such a work in H. E. iii. 3, 2.
39 His name was Takî ed-Dîn Aḥmed ibn 'Alî (1364–1442). He is called El-Makrîzî from Makrîz, a quarter of Baalbek in which his paternal ancestors lived.
40 His principal work is a n historical and topographical description of Egypt entitled El-Mawâ'iẓ wa'l-I'tibâr fî Dhikr el-Khiṭaṭ wa'l-Athâr.
41 El-Maḳrîzî, ed. Wüstenfeld in Abhandlungen, Göttingen Academy, hist.-philol. Classe, III, p. 87; Arabic text, p. 36. There is probably some confusion here with Simon the Tanner (Acts 9, 48; 10, 6. 82).
42 Ibid., p. 21; Arabic text, p. 7.
43 Ibid., p. 21; Arabic text, p. 7: also p. 87; Arabic text. p. 36. The martyrdom of Peter and Paul, “stars among the disciples,” is commemorated on June 29 in the Coptic church.
44 El-Maḳrîzî, p. 87; Arabic text, p. 36.
45 Ibid., p. 22; Arabic text, p. 7. In the convent of Peter and Paul, which lay south of the district of Iṭfîḥ, the fifth of Abîb was kept as a feast-day (El-Maḳrîzî, p. 87; Arabic text, p. 36).
46 El-Maḳrîzî, p. 22; Arabic text, p. 7.
47 De viris ill. 1: Romam pergit, ibique viginti quinque annis cathedram sacerdotalem tenuit.
48 In a fragment of Eusebius's Chronicle preserved by Syncellus it is said that, after founding the first church in Antioch, Peter εἰς ̔Ρώμην ἅπεισι κηρύττων τὸ εὐαγγέλιον (Schoene, , Eusebi Chronicorum Libri Duo, II, p. 152)Google Scholar. There is no mention of an episcopate in Rome or elsewhere. However, according to Jerome's version of the Chronicle, “Petrus apostolus…Romam mittitur. Ubi evangelium praedicans xxv annis eiusdem urbis episcopus perseverat” (Schoene, II, p. 153). The ‘Epitome Syria’ translated into Latin by Roediger says that Peter “in urbem Romam profectus est ibique praedicavit evangelium. Et praefuit ecclesiae illi annos 25” (Schoene, II, p. 211). On the other hand, the Armenian version translated into Latin by Petermann (Schoene, II, p. 150) and the Syriac excerpt found in the Bodleian us. Arch. C 5 and published by Bruns (Repertorium für biblische und morgenländische Litteratur, XI, p. 281) limit Peter's episcopate in Rome to a period of twenty years. However, in the original form of the tradition Peter's episcopate was probably of twenty-five rather than twenty years' duration. In order to explain the discrepancies between the various versions of Eusebius's Chronicle and the Greek fragments, it has been conjectured that the work existed in an earlier and a later edition (Salmon in Dictionary of Christian Biography, II, pp. 322 and 352). The above-mentioned variations, however, can be accounted for quite as easily on the hypothesis that the Chronicle was subjected to one or more recensions after it left the author's hands. This would be entirely natural in the case of a chronological work that was used so much and so widely as the Chronicle of Eusebius. In the Syriac Chronicle of Dionysius Telmaharensis, which is based on Eusebius as far as the age of Constantine, nothing is said about Peter's having been bishop of Rome (Siegfried and Gelzer, Eusebii Canonum Epitome ex Dionysii Telmaharensis Chronico Petita, pp. 49 and 54).
49 See Chase in Hastings's Dict. of the Bible, III, p. 778.
50 Migne, P. L. 7, col. 195.
51 Jerome's Chronicle (ed. Schoene, II, p. 158); the Epitome Syria (ed. Schoene, II, p. 211); and the Armenian Chronicle (ed. Schoene, II, p. 150). The Syriac excerpt published by Bruns (op. cit., XI, p. 281) says nothing about Peter's preaching in Rome.
52 The Arabic version of the Apostolic Church Order has the name James without any further designation at the end of the list. This is probably James the son of Alphaeus, whom the Ethiopic translator understood to be James the brother of the Lord.
53 Wüstenfeld reads 
, which he translates ‘Jacobus, der Sohn des Cleophas’ (op. cit., III, p. 22; Arabic text, p. 7). But 
is not the Arabic equivalent of Cleophas. It is probably a mistake for 
(Alphaeus), though it may possibly be a variant form of this name.
54 14 Luke calls him ‘Simon Zelotes.’ Ζηλωτής is a translation of Καναναῖος or its Aramaic equivalent.
55 The following authorities have Lebbaeus: D 122 k Orint codd. ap. Aug.
56 The Sahidic and Bohairic versions have ‘Judas the brother of James.’
57 In the Arabic and Ethiopic versions Judas has no distinguishing epithet.
58 ‘Judas Zelotes’ is also found in a b g h q gat mm at Matt. 10, 3 as well as in the Roman Chronography of the year 354. Cf. Mommsen, Über den Chronographen vom J. 354, p. 640.