Why does the New Testament go silent on most of the apostles?

NJA said:

Not even a greeting to or from them!
Seeing as the love of God for his people is a major theme of the bible, this seems like a contradiction!
These were Jesus' hand-picked men, witnesses of all that he said and did so that they could teach all nations.

I have highlighted the missing ones ...
“the names of the twelve apostles are these; The first, Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother; James the son of Zebedee (martyred - Acts 12:2), and John his brother; Philip, and Bartholomew; Thomas, and Matthew the publican; James the son of Alphaeus, and Lebbaeus, whose surname was Thaddaeus; Simon the Canaanite, and Judas Iscariot (replaced by Matthias), who also betrayed him."

Click to expand...

They spread out all over the known world. Many were killed for preaching the gospel.

There are traditions about most of their journeys, but remember, they were common laborers, not well educated writers.

It is not surprising that they didn't write much down.

Big Drew said:

The OP raises a good point though...we're lead to believe that the majority of the expansion came from the Holy Spirit's guidance to one man, Paul. I mean, we have a little bit from Peter, John and James...but it's something I've pondered myself, why so much focus on Paul? Even in Acts his story takes up the majority of the text...

Click to expand...

The story of the other apostles is still known in the Apocrypha and Fox's Book of Martyrs. What God wants us to know is how he lead the apostles, which does not need every account given. Even in the Gospels, John makes the statement that if all the things Jesus did were written it would take the whole world to fill it (John 21:25). Again the point is knowing God through Jesus, not his servants.

AlexDTX said:

The story of the other apostles is still known in the Apocrypha and Fox's Book of Martyrs. What God wants us to know is how he lead the apostles, which does not need every account given. Even in the Gospels, John makes the statement that if all the things Jesus did were written it would take the whole world to fill it (John 21:25). Again the point is knowing God through Jesus, not his servants.

Click to expand...

So perhaps we're to learn from the work of the Spirit through Paul that if He can redeem a scoundrel such as him that we're all worthy of redemption?

Big Drew said:

So perhaps we're to learn from the work of the Spirit through Paul that if He can redeem a scoundrel such as him that we're all worthy of redemption?

Click to expand...

There are churches with traditions that do not stem from Paul's European congregations. There you are. Go to Ethiopia or India, for instance, to find them.

RDKirk said:

There are churches with traditions that do not stem from Paul's European congregations. There you are. Go to Ethiopia or India, for instance, to find them.

Click to expand...

Umm ok

NJA said:

OK, I've been thinking about this ... remember, we are not looking for an epistle, just a single sentence, one word even, sent using one person who could write!

Way back in Deuteronomy, Israelites were told to write them (God’s words) upon the posts of thy house, and on thy gates.

Since the time of Solomon (1000BC), Israel had been an international trading nation, joining with the Phonecians. They traded using script. His propverbs (heard by all in the synagogues) say to “get wisdom and understanding” . . . not just “spiritual", in Solomon’s time they excelled in construction and metalwork and finery and trade such as kings and queens came from far and wide and were amazed … this knowledge would have been taught to other members of Israel society so they could continue to prosper.

Those seeking divorce were to “write a bill of divorce”.

It was in the authorities’ interest to ensure a basic level of literacy so that laws, notices, taxation etc could run smoothly. Very early civilisations such as at Babylon show this. Many clay bullae and vases have been found with personal inscriptions.

Andrew was Peter’s brother, Peter not only read but wrote epistles. It seems unlikely that Andrew was illiterate.

“Philip findeth Nathanael, and saith unto him, We have found him, of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write" (John 1:45) – they were familiar with the writings, as was Jesus, naturally a “common Joe”, a carpenter’s son, he was able to read the scriptures (in fact he was able to reason from them as a 12-year old).

God had given them a good land, they were not living a hand-to-mouth existence, so, the children would not have needed to work as soon as they could walk. So, what did they do with their time? Play all day or get some basic literacy like children hundreds and thousands of years before them?

Matthew (a tax collector) of course wrote a gospel account. I havn't looked into the others, but you get the idea.

Click to expand...

As I said earlier, there is a difference between being able to read and being able to write, particularly significant documents. One might be very well versed in reading and yet not have much reason to write.

But the real point is that Christianity was--and is meant to be--a face-to-face experience.

NJA said:

OK, I've been thinking about this ... remember, we are not looking for an epistle, just a single sentence, one word even, sent using one person who could write!

Way back in Deuteronomy, Israelites were told to write them (God’s words) upon the posts of thy house, and on thy gates.

Since the time of Solomon (1000BC), Israel had been an international trading nation, joining with the Phonecians. They traded using script. His propverbs (heard by all in the synagogues) say to “get wisdom and understanding” . . . not just “spiritual", in Solomon’s time they excelled in construction and metalwork and finery and trade such as kings and queens came from far and wide and were amazed … this knowledge would have been taught to other members of Israel society so they could continue to prosper.

Those seeking divorce were to “write a bill of divorce”.

It was in the authorities’ interest to ensure a basic level of literacy so that laws, notices, taxation etc could run smoothly. Very early civilisations such as at Babylon show this. Many clay bullae and vases have been found with personal inscriptions.

Andrew was Peter’s brother, Peter not only read but wrote epistles. It seems unlikely that Andrew was illiterate.

“Philip findeth Nathanael, and saith unto him, We have found him, of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write" (John 1:45) – they were familiar with the writings, as was Jesus, naturally a “common Joe”, a carpenter’s son, he was able to read the scriptures (in fact he was able to reason from them as a 12-year old).

God had given them a good land, they were not living a hand-to-mouth existence, so, the children would not have needed to work as soon as they could walk. So, what did they do with their time? Play all day or get some basic literacy like children hundreds and thousands of years before them?

Matthew (a tax collector) of course wrote a gospel account. I havn't looked into the others, but you get the idea.

Click to expand...

As I said earlier, there is a difference between being able to read and being able to write, particularly significant documents. One might be very well versed in reading and yet not have much reason to write.

But the real point is that Christianity was--and is meant to be--a face-to-face experience.

NJA said:

OK, I've been thinking about this ... remember, we are not looking for an epistle, just a single sentence, one word even, sent using one person who could write!

Way back in Deuteronomy, Israelites were told to write them (God’s words) upon the posts of thy house, and on thy gates.

Since the time of Solomon (1000BC), Israel had been an international trading nation, joining with the Phonecians. They traded using script. His propverbs (heard by all in the synagogues) say to “get wisdom and understanding” . . . not just “spiritual", in Solomon’s time they excelled in construction and metalwork and finery and trade such as kings and queens came from far and wide and were amazed … this knowledge would have been taught to other members of Israel society so they could continue to prosper.

Those seeking divorce were to “write a bill of divorce”.

It was in the authorities’ interest to ensure a basic level of literacy so that laws, notices, taxation etc could run smoothly. Very early civilisations such as at Babylon show this. Many clay bullae and vases have been found with personal inscriptions.

Andrew was Peter’s brother, Peter not only read but wrote epistles. It seems unlikely that Andrew was illiterate.

“Philip findeth Nathanael, and saith unto him, We have found him, of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write" (John 1:45) – they were familiar with the writings, as was Jesus, naturally a “common Joe”, a carpenter’s son, he was able to read the scriptures (in fact he was able to reason from them as a 12-year old).

God had given them a good land, they were not living a hand-to-mouth existence, so, the children would not have needed to work as soon as they could walk. So, what did they do with their time? Play all day or get some basic literacy like children hundreds and thousands of years before them?

Matthew (a tax collector) of course wrote a gospel account. I havn't looked into the others, but you get the idea.

Click to expand...

As I said earlier, there is a difference between being able to read and being able to write, particularly significant documents. One might be very well versed in reading and yet not have much reason to write.

But the real point is that Christianity was--and is meant to be--a face-to-face experience.

Big Drew said:

Umm ok

Click to expand...

You sound like you've never heard of that...or don't believe it.

Big Drew said:

Umm ok

Click to expand...

You sound like you've never heard of that...or don't believe it.

RDKirk said:

You sound like you've never heard of that...or don't believe it.

Click to expand...

No, it wasn't that...I just wasn't sure how to take the tone of your post. I've heard this before though. I know Thomas is said to have founded the church in India, and Andrew in the British Isles.

RDKirk said:

You sound like you've never heard of that...or don't believe it.

Click to expand...

No, not at all...I just wasn't sure how to take the tone of your post. I've heard this before though. I know Thomas is said to have founded the church in India, and Andrew in the British Isles.

RDKirk said:

You sound like you've never heard of that...or don't believe it.

Click to expand...

No, not at all...I just wasn't sure how to take the tone of your post. I've heard this before though. I know Thomas is said to have founded the church in India, and Andrew in the British Isles.

NJA said:

Not even a greeting to or from them!
Seeing as the love of God for his people is a major theme of the bible, this seems like a contradiction!
These were Jesus' hand-picked men, witnesses of all that he said and did so that they could teach all nations.

I have highlighted the missing ones ...
“the names of the twelve apostles are these; The first, Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother; James the son of Zebedee (martyred - Acts 12:2), and John his brother; Philip, and Bartholomew; Thomas, and Matthew the publican; James the son of Alphaeus, and Lebbaeus, whose surname was Thaddaeus; Simon the Canaanite, and Judas Iscariot (replaced by Matthias), who also betrayed him."

Click to expand...

The apostles are there. They are not often mentioned in the bible as often you would like them to be mentioned because they are active in the Church of Christ. What is disclosed in the bible are those which are important teachings of the Lord Jesus Christ and his apostles are lesser as compared to him.

If the focus is on the apostles, then we are out of focus. Because the bible is about the Lord Jesus Christ and this is what he said:

John 5:39 New International Version (NIV)

You study the Scriptures diligently because you think that in them you have eternal life. These are the very Scriptures that testify about me,

Since the apostles are quite a bundle these are the verses pertaining to Andrew

Matthew 4:18
Matthew 10:2
Mark 1:16
Mark 1:29
Mark 3:18
Mark 13:3
Luke 6:14
John 1:40
John 1:44
John 6:8
John 12:22
Acts 1:13

This is a good question to raise as most Christians undoubtedly credit the Scriptures and the expansion of the early Church to the Apostles, where most would incorrectly define them as being the Twelve.

As for the original Twelve (incl. Matthias) it seems that their ministry was limited to that of the Jews where it was up to the Jewish/Roman Paul to be the primary messenger of the Gospel to the Gentiles, which is who the major books of the NT, except for Hebrews were addressed to. This means that the Jewish Apostles, or more properly the Jewish Apostles whose education was limited to that of Jewish schooling, that this would make them intellectually and culturally unsuited to the task of reaching out to the Gentiles.

When it comes to Paul he stands out amongst the other Twelve in that he was the only theologian amongst them who also had the advantage of some Roman and Greek education, though we can only guess as to how extensive this education was; this means that Paul was from his earliest years best suited to the task of reaching those who he essentially shared a similar mindset with.

As for the expansion of the Gospel within the Roman Empire (excluding the lands surrounding Israel), Paul was undoubtedly the only person who the Lord could effectively employ as the Jewish Twelve were woefully unequipped for this task.

Biblicist said:

This is a good question to raise as most Christians undoubtedly credit the Scriptures and the expansion of the early Church to the Apostles, where most would incorrectly define them as being the Twelve.

As for the original Twelve (incl. Matthias) it seems that their ministry was limited to that of the Jews where it was up to the Jewish/Roman Paul to be the primary messenger of the Gospel to the Gentiles, which is who the major books of the NT, except for Hebrews were addressed to. This means that the Jewish Apostles, or more properly the Jewish Apostles whose education was limited to that of Jewish schooling, that this would make them intellectually and culturally unsuited to the task of reaching out to the Gentiles.

When it comes to Paul he stands out amongst the other Twelve in that he was the only theologian amongst them who also had the advantage of some Roman and Greek education, though we can only guess as to how extensive this education was; this means that Paul was from his earliest years best suited to the task of reaching those who he essentially shared a similar mindset with.

As for the expansion of the Gospel within the Roman Empire (excluding the lands surrounding Israel), Paul was undoubtedly the only person who the Lord could effectively employ as the Jewish Twelve were woefully unequipped for this task.

Click to expand...

Look closely at the interaction of the Hellenist Jews with the Hebraic Jews in Acts. I think I may begin a thread about that.

In those regards, understand that the Freedman's Synagogue would have been a Hellenist synagogue, one that Saul (a Hellenist Jew) was likely familiar with and may have been a member of.

But Saul himself was no ordinary Hellenist Jew. He apparently came from a very well-to-do family (Roman citizenship, sent to Jerusalem to study under a reknown teacher, the fact that his family lineage was maintained, and his extreme pride in it). He apparently also had high ambitions, which would require gaining full acceptance of the Hebraic Jews despite his Hellenist background. I think that ambition drove him to persecute his own "kind" before the Sanhedrin.

But I also think Saul was the Holy Spirit's tool to force the gospel out of Jerusalem even before his conversion:

Saul harassed the Church bitterly. He would go from house to house, drag out both men and women and have them committed to prison. Those who were dispersed by this action went throughout the country, preaching the good news of the message as they went.

Notice the individuals who dispersed--such as Philip--were Hellenists, while the scripture explicitly points out that the apostles stayed in Jerusalem. Interesting is that rather than staying in Jerusalem to root out the leaders of the Church, Saul went far abroad...chasing down Hellenists.

Then the evangelistic center became Antioch--again, Hellinists--and Antioch was where they were first known as "Christians"--a separate sect from mainstream Judaism.

RDKirk said:

Look closely at the interaction of the Hellenist Jews with the Hebraic Jews in Acts. I think I may begin a thread about that.


In those regards, understand that the Freedman's Synagogue would have been a Hellenist synagogue, one that Saul (a Hellenist Jew) was likely familiar with and may have been a member of.

Click to expand...

That would certainly make for an interesting thread.

When it comes to the Hellenist Jews, where many of them could have been second, third or maybe even tenth generation Hellenists, it is difficult to know how many of them actually interacted with the Roman/Greek culture of their day in the areas of theological discussion and with rhetoric etc; did many of them keep to their Jewish circle of friends where they continued to think as Jews or were they able to think and debate with those cultures that had been heavily effected by Greek and Roman thought?

As for the Twelve, who were Galileans, even though they could undoubtedly read and write at least in Aramaic, these rather rustic Jews (as the Galileans were seen as) would hardly be equipped to theologise and to debate with those who were outside of their cultural setting. This certainly placed Paul in a unique position where he was not only an experienced Jewish theologian (prior to his conversion) but his Roman education (as to how extensive this was we do not know) and his important Roman citizenship would have also equipped him to relate to non-Jews which the Galileans Apostles would have undoubtedly struggled with.

NJA said:

Not even a greeting to or from them!
Seeing as the love of God for his people is a major theme of the bible, this seems like a contradiction!
These were Jesus' hand-picked men, witnesses of all that he said and did so that they could teach all nations.

I have highlighted the missing ones ...
“the names of the twelve apostles are these; The first, Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother; James the son of Zebedee (martyred - Acts 12:2), and John his brother; Philip, and Bartholomew; Thomas, and Matthew the publican; James the son of Alphaeus, and Lebbaeus, whose surname was Thaddaeus; Simon the Canaanite, and Judas Iscariot (replaced by Matthias), who also betrayed him."

Click to expand...

NJA, where did Jesus Christ say to His Apostles write all that I had said and done in a book called Bible? The answer Jesus Christ was not worried about it, and neither should you. Christ focus was to establish His Hierarchical Church on Rock guided by the Holy Spirit. This Hierarchical Church founded on Rock, years, years later was then guided by Holy Spirit, to compile what the Holy Spirit wanted in the Bible we have today.

Even though your bible may have a KJV title, It is a Catholic Bible!

NJA said:

What's the point of being "saved" if you are as cold as ice after, leaving people uncared for in a World that hates them for what they believe?

Click to expand...

You are making an assumption here that just isn't supported by the historical record. We have no idea what the relationships were between the Apostles after the ascension of our Lord. Your argument is an argument from silence. One cannot simply assume the the Apostles were "as cold as ice" or "leaving people uncared for" based upon a lack of Scriptural support.

FundyJohn said:

You are making an assumption here that just isn't supported by the historical record. We have no idea what the relationships were between the Apostles after the ascension of our Lord. Your argument is an argument from silence. One cannot simply assume the the Apostles were "as cold as ice" or "leaving people uncared for" based upon a lack of Scriptural support.

Click to expand...

Acts 2 and Acts 4, in agreement, express that they took very close care of the believers.

AlexDTX said:

Because it is about Jesus and the Holy Spirit's expansion of the Church.

Click to expand...

I feel it was probably actually quite deliberate on the part of our Lord to make no great mention of the apostles, or provide any details on most of them...

I recall a nephew of mine asking an online question if anybody knew anything about Simon the Zealot; not Simon Peter, but Peter, one of the twelve (Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13). I thought, "What an obscure question..." Like several of the apostles, there's nothing. The most that could be made of the man was debate over why he would have earned such a title.

That's precisely it. Jewish tradition states that God would not allow Moses' body to be buried because of foreknowledge that the Devil wanted to dig it up so he could seduce the Israelites into worshipping him as a powerful magician/Demi-god, seeing as how he performed so many powerful miracles before the eyes of the people. Did anybody find out where Moses' body was buried? No.

So much for that plan.

Same story here. According to the principle that God uses the weak to shame the strong, and the foolish to shame the wise (1 Corinthians 1:26-29), the disciples actually were nobodies. As the Pharisees noticed, they were just unlearned men. But the Spirit of God came upon them in great power to witness to the resurrection of Jesus Christ, which is the only reason we know of them today.

Many other scriptures I could quote here. But there's a great lesson to be learned for today's entertainment-driven, charismatic leader-led church in the West. They operate under the exact opposite premise of what God would desire for leadership. Their lives are supposed to be hidden in Christ (Colossians 3:3), yet instead they are parading themselves before the world like conquering heroes instead of expiations (the least esteemed members of Roman society, destined to be sacrificed to the gods) being led in triumphal procession to their deaths (1 Corinthians 4:9-13).

Perhaps not. but slowly, we'll see....
WHO BREATHED ALL SCRIPTURE?
That is the utmost , first, most important question that answers all your others , unless there's something else you want to know.
----------------------------------------------------------- next... if YHWH permits >
Can the error(s) in the following quote paragraph be disclosed ? >

NJA said:

Since the time of Solomon (1000BC), Israel had been an international trading nation, joining with the Phonecians. They traded using script. His propverbs (heard by all in the synagogues) say to “get wisdom and understanding” . . . not just “spiritual", in Solomon’s time they excelled in construction and metalwork and finery and trade such as kings and queens came from far and wide and were amazed … this knowledge would have been taught to other members of Israel society so they could continue to prosper.

Click to expand...

---------------------------------------------------------------next, YHWH willing >
WHO cares, and why , to find even a sentence? (p.s. there's a surprise after this, later, YHWH willing) >

NJA said:

OK, I've been thinking about this ... remember, we are not looking for an epistle, just a single sentence, one word even, sent using one person who could write!

Click to expand...

---------------------------------------------Next, YHWH willing > >>
Few people do this today. (I think it is a wonderful idea, to replace so much that is worldly and carnal , to do this) >>> Who does this today ? (I don't , yet).... (well, maybe in a way; but that's another topic)

NJA said:

Way back in Deuteronomy, Israelites were told to write them (God’s words) upon the posts of thy house, and on thy gates.

Click to expand...

----------------------------------------------Next, YHWH willing >
Somewhere in the NEW TESTAMENT, it is written at times the Apostles themselves DID lead a hand-to-mouth existence. EVEN Y'SHUA MESSIAH ! day to day, trusting YHWH.

However - since almost no one does what SCRIPTURE says with their time today,
I can understand this question. Society today, is so far from YHWH(GOD), opposed to Y'SHUA (JESUS) and contrary to YHWH'S WORD, how is anyone to understand ?
(hint: the answer is in the OLD TESTAMENT , AND in the NEW TESTAMENT - the same answer) (or answers) Simply, Truthfully, Beautifully(like the feet bringing good news!) , and full of grace and healing.

NJA said:

God had given them a good land, they were not living a hand-to-mouth existence, so, the children would not have needed to work as soon as they could walk. So, what did they do with their time? Play all day or get some basic literacy like children hundreds and thousands of years before them?

Click to expand...

Hidden In Him said:

Many other scriptures I could quote here. But there's a great lesson to be learned for today's entertainment-driven, charismatic leader-led church in the West. They operate under the exact opposite premise of what God would desire for leadership. Their lives are supposed to be hidden in Christ (Colossians 3:3), yet instead they are parading themselves before the world like conquering heroes instead of expiations (the least esteemed members of Roman society, destined to be sacrificed to the gods) being led in triumphal procession to their deaths (1 Corinthians 4:9-13).

Click to expand...

Amen! I have often said the greatest saints we will meet in heaven will be absolute nobodies to the world because they did their service in total anonymity. Good word, brother.