The Traditional View and the shaliah
It has been traditional to trace the concept of apostleship back to Jesus' ministry, referring particularly to Mark 3:14 and Luke 6:13. What lay behind Jesus' use of the term apostle in these verses? Rengstorf postulates that the word ‘apostle’ in the New Testament has its linguistic and functional roots in the institution of the shaliah [1] - envoys within Rabbinic Judaism. This view is not without its attractive features but it is attended by some difficulties. The institution of shaliah is only found in first century rabbinic Judaism. [2] Schmithals has given further reasons to doubt Rengstorf’s theory, including the lack of proof for attributing a religious rather than just an official character to the shaliah. [3] In sum, opinion is divided on the usefulness of the shaliah for our understanding of apostleship in the New Testament. [4] The lack of early documentary evidence means that any theory would need to be tentative at best. We must look elsewhere to establish a solid basis for the origins of New Testament apostleship.
Apostleship a late import?
It has been observed that the word apostolos is distributed rather unevenly in the New Testament. [5] In an attempt to explain this, a number of scholars (eg A. Fridrischsen, E. Lohse, J. Munck, G. Klein, W. Schmithals) [6] have suggested that the term apostle was only applied to the Twelve at a later date. It is not possible to review this theory in detail here but I will note several reasons why I find it unconvincing in the form advanced by Schmithals. Firstly, this account does not explain why the other apostles lost their status after the term was applied to the Twelve. [7] The presence of apostles in the primitive Jerusalem church (Galatians 1:17 and 1 Corinthians 15:7) is not explained. [8] Finally, I think we should be wary of asserting that a theologian of Paul's stature was unaware of gnosticism's influence on him.
Luke versus the other evangelists and Paul?
If there are problems with Schmithals' theory, we still need to address the general difference between Luke's use of the term apostolos and that of the other evangelists and that of Paul. Colin Brown has observed that, although Luke uses ‘apostle’ more than the other evangelists, there does not seem to be a substantial functional difference in his understanding. [9] Luke only uses the term on five occasions where it is not used by the others. [10] With respect to Paul, while Luke only refers to him as an apostle in 14:4, Paul dominates the account from chapter 13 onwards. Parallels between Peter and Paul have been noted and this would clearly reinforce Paul’s claim to apostleship. [11] Indeed, Acts presents such a positive portrayal of Paul that the book has been seen as an apology for him. [12] It is important to take note of Luke’s use of the term ‘apostle’ but it is equally important to avoid over-emphasising this use and drawing the wrong conclusions.
The 'sending' concept as a starting point
Some scholars have cast doubt on the reliability of Mark 3:14 and Luke 6:13 which both feature the phrase 'whom he also named apostles.' Kruse asserts that the former is not well attested and that the latter is consequently undermined. [13] However, even if we share Kruse's misgivings on this point, I think we can locate our understanding of apostolos within the broader framework of 'sending' in the Gospels. While apostolos is rare in the Gospels, the verb forms apostello and pempo are relatively common. [14] It is possible to cite a number of sayings which have a strong claim to reflecting authentic Jesus tradition. [15] Examples of the use of apostello would be Matthew 15:24 ; Luke 4:18; Luke 22:35. D. Müller has suggested that the verb apostello provides 'a starting point for a solution. Already in secular Greek 'to send' was used as a technical term for a divine authorization, and its sub. was used, admittedly very rarely, with the meaning 'messenger.'' [16] Müller notes that this verb is used for the mission of the prophets. As we discuss below, Müller believes the term to have been applied to the Twelve later. As I have said, I believe the Gospel verses cited above to reflect authentic Jesus tradition but Müller helps us see how a 'sending' concept from the Old Testament may lie behind Jesus' usage.
Trinitarian Apostleship
If we root our definition of apostleship in the Greek verb apostello, I think we will understand the concept in terms of the Holy Spirit's as well as Jesus Christ's mission. Jesus' reference to his own and his disciples' mission in John 20:21 is immediately followed by the breathing out of the Spirit in verse 22. This verse should be seen in the light of John 15:26-7 where Jesus promises to send the Advocate, the Spirit of truth, and says of the Spirit 'he will testify on my behalf.' I therefore think that we should see apostleship as based in the dual missions of Son and Spirit. [17]
[2] J.A. Kirk, Apostleship since Rengstorff: Towards a Synthesis, New Testament Studies 21 (1974/75), p.250; and K. H. Rengstorf, Apostleship (from G. Kittel's Theological Dictionalry of the New Testament), (London: A&C Black, 1952), pp.12-13
[4] cf. C. G. Kruse in Green (1992), p.29 and P. W. Barnett in G. F. Hawthorne et al (ed.), Dictionary of Paul and his Letters (Leicester: IVP, 1993), p.47 versus D. Müller in C. Brown (ed.), The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, (Exeter: Paternoster, 1986), p. 134
[11] I. H. Marshall et al (ed.), Witness to the Gospel: the theology of Acts, (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), p.185
[12] A. J. Mattill, Jr., “Naherwartung, Fernerwartung, and the purpose of Luke-Acts: Weymouth reconsidered”, Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 34.03, pp. 276-293, Source: ATLA Serials, [online], p.292
[17] Paul S. Fiddes, Participating in God: A Pastoral Doctrine of the Trinity, (London: Darton, Longman and Todd, 2000), p.7
No comments:
Post a Comment