This is a very long post. I don't expect anyone will ever read it, but I just wanted to get it onto the record.
What are the names of the twelve apostles?
First we need to work out what is meant by the terms "disciple" and "apostle". Matthew, for example, seems to be unaware of any difference when he says "Jesus called his twelve disciples together" and in the very next sentence he adds "These are the names of the twelve apostles." He seems to be talking about the same twelve men. [Matthew 10:1-4]
Luke,
on the other hand, is well aware of the difference when he writes,
"Jesus...called his disciples to him and chose twelve of them, whom he
named apostles." [Luke 6:12-16]
But
then we turn to the gospel of John and discover that the word "apostle"
is never used. John always refers to the twelve "disciples", never the
twelve "apostles". It was the disciples who witnessed the first miracle
at the wedding in Cana. It was the disciples who ate the last supper
with Jesus. It was the disciples to whom Jesus gave the miraculous catch
of fish after his resurrection. If we read only the gospel of John, we
wouldn't even know what an apostle was!
So
here's how it works: Jesus had many followers called disciples and he
chose twelve of them to be his assistants and they were known either as
the "The Twelve", "The Disciples", or "The Apostles", depending on which
gospel you are reading.
The bible mentions a large number of apostles including many who were selected by church members after Jesus had died. Men like Matthias, Paul and Barnabas for example. In this post we are considering only those apostles chosen by Jesus himself. The twelve apostles who became known as "The Twelve". Just one problem - there were fifteen of them!
The bible mentions a large number of apostles including many who were selected by church members after Jesus had died. Men like Matthias, Paul and Barnabas for example. In this post we are considering only those apostles chosen by Jesus himself. The twelve apostles who became known as "The Twelve". Just one problem - there were fifteen of them!
The apostles are named in:
Matthew 10:2-4
Mark 2:14
Mark 3:16-19
Luke 5:27
Luke 6:14-16
John 1:40-43
John 6:71
John 14:22
John 21:2
Here’s a chart showing the names of the apostles as they appear in the New Testament:
These are the twelve commonly accepted apostles:
Simon/Peter
Andrew (son of Zebedee)
James (son of Zebedee)
John
Philip
Bartholomew
James (son of Alphaeus)
Judas Iscariot
Matthew
Thomas
Simon the Zealot
Thaddaeus.
But we are still left with:
- Nathanael
- Judas (the son of James)
- Levi
Let's start with Nathanael --- at the Key Way website Wayne Blank says,
He says "many logically assume" that Nathanael and Bartholomew are two names for the one man, and since I was keen to discover what sort of "logic" they were using, I turned to some of the online Bible Commentaries for information. I need hardly have bothered; they've got nothing (my comments in red):Bartholomew and Nathanael are recorded in the listings of the twelve apostles, but never together. In Matthew, Mark and Luke, Bartholomew is listed as one of the twelve, but Nathanael is not. Conversely, in John, Nathanael is listed, but Bartholomew is not. From that, many logically assume that Bartholomew and Nathanael were actually the same man who was known by two names.
http://www.keyway.ca/htm2005/20051130.htm
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers
Nathanael is ... probably to be identified with the “Bartholomew” of the earlier Gospels.
The key word is "probably" - so no evidence.
Benson Commentary
Another was Nathanael ... Some, however, think he was the same with Bartholomew, one of the twelve.
The key words are "Some, however, think" - so no evidence.
John Lightfoot's Commentary On The Gospels
Nathanael (who seems to be the same with Bartholomew)
The key words are "seems to be" - so no evidence
In
the chart (above) I have colour coded the slots for Nathanael and
Bartholomew so you can easily see what the Christian Apologists have
done. Without a scrap of evidence to back them up, they have simply
moved Nathanael's name from the bottom of the list, up to another slot
which lies adjacent to Bartholomew's name on the chart and casually
renamed him Nathanael Bartholomew.
Summary
The apologists think they have reduced the number of apostles by one, but they don't have any evidence for that claim; just wishful thinking (seems to be...some think...probably). In reality the count remains unchanged. We still have fifteen apostles listed in the New Testament.
Summary
The apologists think they have reduced the number of apostles by one, but they don't have any evidence for that claim; just wishful thinking (seems to be...some think...probably). In reality the count remains unchanged. We still have fifteen apostles listed in the New Testament.
Next we shall consider Judas, the son of James (who is called Judas, the brother of James, in some versions of the New Testament).
Some apologists say that the name "Judas" was tarnished by Judas Iscariot (who betrayed Jesus) and therefore Matthew and Mark tried to distance him from the betrayer by renaming him Thaddaeus.
Other apologists don't even bother with an explanation, they simply claim that Thaddaeus was actually Judas the son of James - and that's the end of that! Here's an example:
And I thought this was rather cute:The name Thaddaeus appears in the list of Apostles given in Matthew 10:3, between James, son of Alphaeus, and Simon the Zealot. In Mark 3:18, the name Thaddaeus appears, again, in the same placement. In Acts 1:13, however, a man named Judas, son of James, is listed below Simon. And in Luke 6:16, Judas (son of James), is listed again among the 12 Apostles, between Simon the Zealot and Judas Iscariot. In John 14:22, there is a reference to Judas (not Iscariot) who spoke to Jesus. The two names, however, never appear in the same book, lending credence to the belief that they both refer to the same person.
http://www.aboutbibleprophecy.com/p155.htm
"The two names ... never appear in the same book". How the hell does that "lend credence" to the claim that Judas and Thaddaeus were one and the same?
The first Judas, son of James, was also called Thaddeus in the book of Mark. It was common for the disciples to have multiple names ... As a young boy I had two names: my real name and a nick name. Multiple names are common.
https://www.neverthirsty.org/bible-qa/qa-archives/
The apologist had a nickname as a child - so why couldn't Judas have been nicknamed Thaddaeus? Biblical scholarship at its finest.
In
the chart (above) I have colour coded the slots for Thaddaeus and Judas
so you can easily see what the Christian Apologists have
done. Without a scrap of evidence to back them up, they have simply
moved Judas' name from the bottom of the list, up to another slot
which lies adjacent to Thaddaeus' name on the chart and casually
renamed him Judas Thaddaeus.
Summary
The apologists think they have reduced the number of apostles by one, but they don't have any evidence; just wishful thinking. In reality the count remains unchanged. We still have fifteen apostles listed in the New Testament.
Summary
The apologists think they have reduced the number of apostles by one, but they don't have any evidence; just wishful thinking. In reality the count remains unchanged. We still have fifteen apostles listed in the New Testament.
Now we come to Levi...
At first glance it seems that the apologists might be onto something. If we read the gospels in the order in which they appear in the New Testament, we get the following story:
Obviously this apostle named Matthew the tax collector in chapter ten, is the same Matthew who was called to follow Jesus in chapter nine.In Matthew's gospel a man named Matthew is described as a tax collector (or publican in the King James Version) and when Jesus calls him, Matthew follows. Then Matthew prepares a meal for Jesus and his friends. The Pharisees complain about the number of tax collectors at the house (tax collectors were outcasts in those days) but Jesus reminds them that he is not there to save respectable people, he's trying to save sinners and outcasts. (Matthew 9:9-13)
Then, in the very next chapter of the same gospel, we find a list of the twelve apostles and right there in among them all, we can see "Matthew the tax collector". (Matthew 10:3)
The next gospel in the New Testament was written by Mark and we find him telling the same story about a tax collector who followed Jesus - but this time the tax collector is named Levi. Apart from that name change, however, it's exactly the same story as told earlier in the gospel of Matthew:
There are so many similarities in these stories that it seems obvious that they are about the same man. Both gospel writers know that the tax collector's name is Matthew but it seems that Mark also knows that his second name is Levi.Levi is a tax collector (or publican in the King James Version) who is called to follow Jesus. After the call, Levi invites Jesus to share a meal with him. The Pharisees complain about all the tax collectors at the house but Jesus explains "I have come to call not the righteous but sinners." (Mark 2:13-17)
Then, in the very next chapter of the same gospel, we find a list of the twelve apostles but there is no one named Levi. There is, however, an apostle named Matthew. (Mark 3:18)
It is no surprise then, that we find almost every Christian on the planet happily agreeing that Matthew and Levi are two names for the one man and so the list of fifteen named apostles has been reduced by one - or has it?
We have been reading the various stories as they currently appear in the New Testament, but the whole thing takes on a completely different look, if we read the gospels in the order in which they were actually written.
Mark was written in 70AD
Ten years later, in 80AD, Matthew decided to write an updated version of Mark's gospel. Matthew copied most of Mark's gospel word-for-word but he did make small alterations from time time. Matthew also added a lot of extra detail which Mark had not included in his own gospel - the story of the birth of Jesus for example.
Ten years later still, in 90AD, Luke brought out a new edition of the same basic gospel. Like Matthew before him, Luke copied most of Mark's gospel word-for-word, but he made some minor alterations along the way. He also added a lot of extra detail that had not been included in either Mark's gospel, or Matthew's. Luke also made some changes to to story of the birth of Jesus. For example, whereas Matthew said that Jesus was born circa 6BC during the reign of King Herod, Luke said Jesus was born during the time of the census organised by Quirinius in 6AD.
So let us now put the gospels into the order in which they were written - Mark, Matthew, Luke - and see what happens to the story of Matthew and Levi:
First
of all Mark tells us (in 70AD) that a tax collector named Levi was
called to follow Jesus. Later, when Levi invited Jesus to share a meal,
the Pharisees complained about the number of tax collectors in the house
and Jesus explained "I have come to call not the righteous but sinners." (Mark 2:13-17)
In
the very next chapter we find Mark's list of apostles, but Levi is not
among them. Levi seems to have disappeared into thin air. His name
appears once in chapter two and that's the last we see of him. His name
is never mentioned again.
We do have Matthew's name appearing on Mark's list of apostles
but notice that the reference contains only Matthew's name and no other
details; no mention of Matthew being a tax collector, so there is no
connection between Matthew and Levi.
Remember
that this was decades before any of the other gospels were written, so
there is no way that anyone could have had gained even the slightest
hint that Matthew was a tax collector. Levi was the tax collector, but,
in Mark's gospel, he was not connected to Matthew in any way at all.
-----
Next
we have Matthew's gospel which was written about ten years after Mark's
gospel first appeared. The author of this second gospel is copying
Mark's gospel almost word-for-word and he notices the same thing that we
just noticed - Levi is called to be an apostle in Mark's chapter two,
but he is not listed as an apostle in chapter three!
And this is where we get our first hint that the gospels were not inspired by the Almighty God of Truth, but were written, instead, by people who were quite prepared to tell lies when it suited them to do so. In this case, the author of the second gospel casually deletes "Levi" from the story and replaces him with "Matthew". (see Matthew 9:9-13)
But the author of the gospel of Matthew didn't stop there. In the next chapter of his gospel, he dutifully copied down Mark's list of the twelve apostles but when he came to Matthew's name he compounded his original lie by adding the words "the tax collector".
For the last ten years the apostle Matthew had been nothing more than the apostle named "Matthew," but now, in this new gospel, the apostle Matthew has suddenly become "Matthew the tax collector".
This was brand new information that no Christian had ever heard before - which is not surprising since the author of the second gospel had only just made it up.
And he made it up so that the Matthew who replaced Levi in chapter nine could be more easily connected to the Matthew listed as an apostle in chapter ten. (They are both described as "tax collectors" so the connection seems obvious to the casual reader - just a shame that it is based on a lie and completely untrue.)
And this is where we get our first hint that the gospels were not inspired by the Almighty God of Truth, but were written, instead, by people who were quite prepared to tell lies when it suited them to do so. In this case, the author of the second gospel casually deletes "Levi" from the story and replaces him with "Matthew". (see Matthew 9:9-13)
But the author of the gospel of Matthew didn't stop there. In the next chapter of his gospel, he dutifully copied down Mark's list of the twelve apostles but when he came to Matthew's name he compounded his original lie by adding the words "the tax collector".
For the last ten years the apostle Matthew had been nothing more than the apostle named "Matthew," but now, in this new gospel, the apostle Matthew has suddenly become "Matthew the tax collector".
This was brand new information that no Christian had ever heard before - which is not surprising since the author of the second gospel had only just made it up.
And he made it up so that the Matthew who replaced Levi in chapter nine could be more easily connected to the Matthew listed as an apostle in chapter ten. (They are both described as "tax collectors" so the connection seems obvious to the casual reader - just a shame that it is based on a lie and completely untrue.)
-----
Luke's
gospel came ten years later in about 90AD. He was aware of the lies
that had been included in the gospel of Matthew and decided not to repeat
them in his own gospel.
Instead he took inspiration from Mark and copied that gospel almost word-for-word. So once again we have Levi the tax collector being called by Jesus and then disappearing into thin air; never to be heard from again!
And in Luke's list of apostles we find Matthew's name but there is no mention that he was a tax collector.
Clearly there is no evidence to suggest that Levi was just another name for Matthew. In fact it would be impossible to connect the two names were it not for the blatant lies told by the author of the gospel of Matthew. And so the count remains unchanged - we still have fifteen named apostles in the New Testament; all of them vying to be included among The Twelve.
Instead he took inspiration from Mark and copied that gospel almost word-for-word. So once again we have Levi the tax collector being called by Jesus and then disappearing into thin air; never to be heard from again!
And in Luke's list of apostles we find Matthew's name but there is no mention that he was a tax collector.
-----
Clearly there is no evidence to suggest that Levi was just another name for Matthew. In fact it would be impossible to connect the two names were it not for the blatant lies told by the author of the gospel of Matthew. And so the count remains unchanged - we still have fifteen named apostles in the New Testament; all of them vying to be included among The Twelve.
No comments:
Post a Comment