What If…the Twelve…

…the Chosen and the Sent Ones!

Remember when Jesus said to those He had chosen:

“Did I Myself not choose you, the twelve, and yet one of you is a devil?” John 6:70

The word is “diabolos”, it is the noun form of a compound verb that is derived from the prefix “dia” which means “through, on account of, because of” and the verb “ballo” – “to throw, cast”. The verb form referred to the bringing of charges, usually with hostile intent and describes slanderous accusations being hurled at an adversary. And so the word we know as “devil” describes the one who casts slanderous aspersion toward another. And Jesus, after shocking the crowd by His provocative challenge that they must eat of His flesh and drink of His blood and after gaining a renewed commitment from the twelve that they will stay with Him, declares that one of them will not only walk away, but will slander His name in the process.

Each of the gospels recounts the gathering of the twelve with its own slant, as one would expect. Even the names were recorded slightly differently; as is the sequence of their being called out and chosen by Jesus Himself.

Who were these guys? I mean, if a person was reading the story of Jesus for the first time, having no background knowledge of the people involved, what would that person’s impressions of these guys be? What if each one of us were asked to explain to someone who is in this place of naïveté, exactly who Nathaniel was (or Thaddeus, or James…) and what it was that he was asked to do that set him apart from the rest of those who followed Jesus?

Having raised a few curious children and spent some time with relatively new Christians, my experience tells me that these guys are seen as a bit of a puzzle to the “outsider”; not the kind of men that say, a Christian leader might appoint over the children’s ministry. Simply put, what they had going for them was that He chose them. But “why” He chose them is not immediately obvious, neither is what they were chosen to do.

When teaching a child (or a child in the Lord, no matter their age), it is important for them to know what God meant, when He said what He said to the writers of scripture; that they then captured, copied and preserved. Doing that (teaching the meaning) takes a little more time than it does to just read words; words that often the “child” doesn’t truly grasp. We have been blessed with the tools to enable that – and often they are just a click or two away.

This, the understanding and communication of His meaning, is the core reason I am motivated to do these “What if’s”; to draw attention to what I (and others with whom I interact) accept as obvious, when in reality, it isn’t obvious at all. I mean, just because everyone believes they “know” where “angels” come from and what they “look like”, doesn’t mean that they truly do. I have come across a number of terms and phrases in our common translations that many believe they know and understand His meaning, only to discover with a simple review that we don’t.

For the “What if” occasions that I have found, almost without exception, the source of the lack of understanding can be tied to a decision (from very early on in the process of translating and copying the Word of God), to not actually translate a word from the original language; to, instead, transliterate or even substitute altogether.

Let me quickly add: that there is more than one way to translate the verified, original scrips into any particular language is indisputable – because language is nuanced. That any of those translations can and have been refined can also not be denied (in other words, there are multiple “editions” of the New American Standard Bible, for example). That the various translations are joined by even more devotional or expositional works, those that focus more (and maybe exclusively) on application than they do on an attempt to interpret the originals, is also given.

All that said: I absolutely believe that the Holy Spirit – despite the variety – will lead us into all Truth, if we submit to His leading as we read and meditate on the written word. (He does, after all, work in and through flawed and feeble men and women.)

As I have noted before, William Tyndale was executed for translating the Greek New Testament into English (circa 1526). His being burnt at the stake was because that translation fulfilled the very desire for which Tyndale believed he was commissioned: to put the Word of God into the hands of the common People of God – not just in those of the clergy or monarchy. His faith was that the Lord had intended the entire congregation of believers, by the leading of the Holy Spirit, to have a say in how the doctrines and principles He had given were to be lived out.

Back to the twelve.

As I trust you have noticed, I have refrained from calling the twelve by the “title” we are most accustomed to assigning to them: “apostle”. This is in fact the word that I believe has lost His meaning. As is the pattern, this word is partially derived from the Latin and was first found in English language writings in the early 12^thcentury. It is an almost exact transliteration of a Greek word: “apostolos”. For context, there are occasions in the Septuagint where that Greek word is used to replace the Hebrew word seen as “shalach” which means “to stretch forth or to send”, though the Greek equivalent word most widely used to replace “shalach” is the verb “pempo”. The Hebrew term that is closest in meaning to “apostolos” is “tsir” which means “an envoy, messenger”.

So what’s my point?

There is a very useful and common definition that those who spoke Koine Greek would understand when they heard the word we see as “apostolos”. In their minds, they would envision someone who was under the authority of a master, lord or sovereign; who had been given specific orders to carry out and the delegated authority to do so; and that those orders were in regard to someone outside of the master’s domain. By the way, if that same Greek speaking person was told that the individual being seen was a “meree”, they would be just as confused as a new Christian likely is the first time they hear the word “apostle”. (For the curious, “meree” is the phonetic transliteration of the Egyptian word for “envoy”.)

And so, I once again cannot help but wonder why the early translators would have chosen to transliterate the word rather than to translate the Greek word into a commonly understood English (in our case) word or term?

One might ask: What if there was no English word for “messenger” or “one sent with specific orders” or “envoy” or “ambassador” back in the 12^th century? What if the concept itself was so foreign that transliterating the Greek and, in essence, manufacturing a new word was the only way?

Great question!

A quick look at the etymology of any word in a collegiate level dictionary will point out that much of what has become English was drawn from the ancient languages with either Greek/Latin or Germanic roots. So, it is certainly reasonable to expect a Greek word to develop into an English word. However, if you use that same collegiate level dictionary regarding “apostle” you will find, along with the etymology, a curious notation: until relatively recently, the word was only used in relationship with Christianity.

The word did not develop into an English term for “one being sent with specific orders”, it was isolated as a term (in essence a title) found in the New Testament that was assigned to or was used to described the twelve men chosen by Christ. What typical language developments that can be discerned from the “original” transliteration, are branches from that very tree, expansions of an idea that intentionally and selectively focuses on twelve named men who followed Jesus.

Oh, it should also be noted that the ideas of “messenger”, “envoy”, “one sent”, et al. are found in early English writings. So there was no need to “coin” a new term.

Even if the transliteration was justified early on, it did not effectively communicate the original intent of the Greek word and so either our definitions should have modified, or an actual translation should have been accepted. I cannot help (especially now that I have been paying attention) but wonder: What if there remains a bit of the “victory over the people” attitude that we, like those of Ephesus near the end of the first century, need to hate? (see Rev.2:6)

So far I have spent significant time addressing the points of logic behind why I believe this “what if” scenario deserves attention. Before I move back to the more important aspect of its implications to our doctrines and principles, allow me to summarize those points:

That there are words that were transliterated, in some fashion or another, does not, alone, suggest an attempt to propagate or even retain a concept that the scriptures themselves do not support; it does however facilitate that possibility. For example, many names and places have been transliterated in both Old and New Testaments. And though knowing the meaning of “Judah” or “Joseph” or “Bethlehem” can add depth to one’s study, it is certainly a rational approach for them to have been transliterated.

In my research, the vast majority of transliterations (excluding the “names and places” variety) occurred in the New Testament books, some of which were then “pushed back” into the translations of the Old Testament (as we saw with the phonetic transliteration “angel”).

Unsurprisingly, the transliterations are more heavily evident within the topics of the Christian life, including our instructions regarding how we gather and how we are to act relative to the Spiritual nature of our new birth into the kingdom of God.

Within those topics just noted, along with the “errant” transliterations, can also be found a small, but significant, number of words that were either modified from early English translations without sufficient cause or were misinterpreted originally and have yet to be corrected, resulting in ongoing misunderstandings of the inspired writers’ original meanings. (It should be noted that there are a number of occasions where those misinterpretations have been corrected as further research has enhanced the clarity regarding extra-Biblical usage of specific words and phrases.)

It bears repeating – none of what I am sharing is intended to encourage doubt regarding the inspiration of the Holy Spirit on the original writers, or His involvement in shepherding those words and meanings over the course of the nearly two thousand years since the final book was scribed. On the contrary, when we consider that the New Testament writers (and therefore the saints overall) were expecting Jesus to return “soon” (though it appears Peter was an exception - see 2Peter 3:3-17), the fact that we have access to His Word is a clear indication of His choice to keep it available to us!

It is my hope to challenge each of us, as members of His body – the living stones of the house He is building (for we are those whom He has called out of darkness and into the glory of His Light) – to be diligent in our attempt to be found approved! To do that we need to act as the royalty we are – joint-heirs with our Lord and Savior – and diligently search out the concealed things of God! (see Proverbs 25:2)

---

What if we more fully understood what it means to be chosen and sent out by Him?

For starters – the idea behind this word, along with its root and derivatives, can be found well over 200 times in the New Testament, about 80 of which are the transliterations of the noun form (including “false apostles”). (As a point of comparison, the idea of “church” is addressed about 111 times in the New Testament.) It is noteworthy that the verb form is never transliterated (i.e., we never see the term “apostled” or the phrase “to apostle”) but is seen most frequently as “to send, sent, sent out”.

I want to look first at a few of the instances when the twelve are designated as those who are being sent out with specific orders and then move on to passages when the same word is used to describe others with a similar commission.

Jesus summoned His twelve disciples and gave them authority over unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal every kind of disease and every kind of sickness.

In the light of what I believe to be the underlying value of addressing the implications of this topic, this concise description from Matthew could easily serve as our definition of those whom he then names as “apostolos” – the ones summoned (the word is “proskaleō” and it means “to call to”) and granted authority to fulfill the commission of the One Who is sending them.

Now the names of the twelve “envoys” are these: The first, Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother; and James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother; Philip and Bartholomew; Thomas and Matthew the tax collector; James the son of Alphaeus, and Thaddaeus; Simon the Zealot, and Judas Iscariot, the one who betrayed Him.

These twelve Jesus “sent out” (this is the root word, a verb from which “apostolos” is derived) after instructing them: “Do not go in the way of the Gentiles, and do not enter any city of the Samaritans; but rather go to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. And as you go, preach, saying, ‘The kingdom of heaven is at hand.’ Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse the lepers, cast out demons. Freely you received, freely give. Do not acquire gold, or silver, or copper for your money belts, or a bag for your journey, or even two coats, or sandals, or a staff; for the worker is worthy of his support. And whatever city or village you enter, inquire who is worthy in it, and stay at his house until you leave that city. As you enter the house, give it your greeting. If the house is worthy, give it your blessing of peace. But if it is not worthy, take back your blessing of peace. Whoever does not receive you, nor heed your words, as you go out of that house or that city, shake the dust off your feet. Truly I say to you, it will be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah in the day of judgment than for that city. Matt.10:1-15

So here we have Jesus calling to those whom He has chosen (in this case, the twelve disciples), granting them authority to perform certain tasks and then sending them away to do as He has instructed them.

As the passage continues in Matthew’s gospel, Jesus gives further details about what they are being asked to do – and what the implications of their obedience will be! It is in this first “great commission” that they are told of the divisions that will come from their ministry, of their own expectation of persecution, of God’s care during those times, of the extreme nature of Jesus’ own mission (that He did not come to bring peace, but division) and then He ends with this:

“He who receives you receives Me, and he who receives Me receives Him Who “sent” Me. He who receives a “prophet” (another of those pesky transliterations – we will come back to another time – the word means “one who speaks before in either place or time”) in the authority of a “prophet” shall receive a “prophet’s” wages; and he who receives an innocent in the authority of an innocent shall receive an innocent’s wages. And whoever in the authority of a disciple gives to one of these little ones even a cup of cold water to drink, truly I say to you, he shall not lose his wages.”

When Jesus had finished appointing His twelve disciples, He departed from there to teach and proclaim in their cities. Matt. 10:40-11:1

These disciples were clearly given an appointment as envoys, as those sent with specific orders and with the delegated authority to carry those orders out. Unfortunately when we read the word “apostle” we are unlikely to understand what it is that sits behind that “title”; what, in essence, makes the “title” meaningful. In fact – most Christians, when they read or hear that word think they (the “apostles”) are the authority!

Ethan (13) at the top and Olivia (4) shared a birthday yesterday!

Another interesting example – that also happens to tie-in “the little ones” – is found in Luke 17.

He said to His disciples, “It is inevitable that stumbling blocks come, but woe to him through whom they come! It would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck and he were thrown into the sea, than that he would cause one of these little ones to stumble. Be on your guard!

“If your brother sins, rebuke him; and if he repents, forgive him. And if he sins against you seven times a day, and returns to you seven times, saying, ‘I repent,’ forgive him.” Luke 17:1-4

The structure of the statements is interesting. Jesus had just told the story of the rich man and Lazarus; the story that focused on the importance of believing the testimony of the Word – those who don’t believe the Word are not going to be persuaded by resurrection! The segue suggests that He is trying to make it clear to His followers that those to whom the story was told (the Pharisees who loved money) were those at grave risk of setting traps for the people – and that those who do set traps will face serious consequences. But that they (His disciples) need to focus on confronting and forgiving those close to them who do wrong. And that their forgiveness should have no measurable bounds.

The “ones He has sent out to complete specific tasks” said to the Lord, “Increase our faith!” And the Lord said, “If you had faith like a mustard seed, you would say to this mulberry tree, ‘Be uprooted and be planted in the sea’; and it would have obeyed.” Luke 17:5-6

I think it significant that Luke refers to them here as the envoys of God, those who He had recently sent out with the authority to do miracles! And that it is in the context of forgiving one another that they cry out for increased faith. (So either they were more petty than I have imagined, or…I have seriously underestimated the importance (and power) of forgiveness!) And then Jesus prods them with the fact that it isn’t faith that they need, but simple obedience (or so it seems to me).

This next passage will be the last that focuses directly on the twelve; those ones called, chosen and sent away with specific orders and the delegated authority and ability to carry those orders out.

The first account I composed, Theophilus, about all that Jesus began to do and teach, until the day when He was taken up to heaven, after He had by the Holy Spirit given orders to the “ones whom He had chosen and sent away”. To these He also presented Himself alive after His suffering, by many convincing proofs, appearing to them over a period of forty days and speaking of the things concerning the kingdom of God. Gathering them together, He commanded them not to leave Jerusalem, but to wait for what the Father had promised, “Which,” He said, “you heard of from Me; for John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now.” Acts 1:1-5

Luke’s second book is opened with him describing to his friend the bridge between the gospel account and the acts that came after Jesus’ ascension. Luke identifies them as those chosen (the word is “eklegō” and it means “to select”; remember in school when everyone who line up and teams would be chosen?) and sent out with orders to accomplish the mission. Luke then notes their additional commands and the purpose for them: to wait and to be enabled by being immersed in the Holy Spirit. Luke then relays to Theophilus the last words heard by any of those who had walked with Him – until John sees Him again some 66 years later:

“It is not for you to know times or epochs which the Father has fixed by His own authority; but you will receive power at the coming of the Holy Spirit upon you; and you shall be of Me witnesses in both Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria, unto the last end of the earth.” Acts 1:7-8

Twenty-eight times in Luke’s second book he references those who had been called, chosen and commissioned to be sent out with specific tasks and orders, and the power and authority necessary to complete their mission successfully. And, as we will see, in this paradigm they are doing exactly what Jesus Himself did. These men were not an authority to themselves (which is what the “psuedapostolos” claim to be) but are instead representatives of the power of the Father, with specific orders which they were tasked to obey.

After healing the beggar, lame from birth, Peter is given the opportunity to proclaim the good news of the ransom price that Jesus had paid for all of the created order; including all of those who were at the temple and were listening to him. In the midst of that sermon we are told that he explains to them:

And now, brethren, I know that you acted in ignorance, just as your rulers did also. But the things which God announced beforehand by the mouth of all the prophets, that His Christ would suffer, He has thus fulfilled. Therefore repent and return, so that your sins may be wiped away, in order that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord; and that He may send (the word is the verb “apostellō”) Jesus, the Christ appointed for you, whom heaven must receive until the period of restoration of all things about which God spoke by the mouth of His holy prophets from ancient time. Acts 3:17-21

Jesus was sent by the Father, which means He was given specific orders to fulfill, and which He of course did. Hebrews 3:1-2 makes it absolutely clear by encouraging us as the saints who have been allowed to partake of a heavenly calling, to consider Jesus Who is the “One sent” by the Father and the High Priest of our confession; He was faithful in all that the Father appointed Him.

But Jesus was not the only One sent by the Father. In the Revelation, in our chapter 5, as John is witnessing the Revelation of Jesus as our Near Kinsman – the One Worthy to take the sealed book (which we know from Jeremiah 32 and Leviticus 25 to be the Book of Redemption – the contract of the restoration of our inheritance) and to look into the book and to open its seals – John turns to see the Lion of Judah, the Root of David but instead sees the Lamb as Slain. And in this revelation of Jesus, John also notes the “seven horns and seven eyes, which are the Spirit of God, sent out into all the earth.”

And so we have the Spirit of God being sent out as One Who has received specific orders. Orders that, if I might, could also aid in the very promise to which Peter alluded back in Acts 3:21 – the times of the restoration, the giving back of all things. The very authority that a Near Kinsman (the Hebrew word also means “redeemer” – because only a near kinsman had the right to buy back a relative’s lost freedom and/or inheritance) would have under the statutes of the Laws of God!

And if it seems a little like I have strayed from the point, please believe that I have not at all. That, in fact, our ability to fully grasp what it meant to be an envoy, an ambassador, a messenger who had not only been given specific tasks and commissions, but also the required power and authority to accomplish those things, will add, not only, a significant degree of clarity relative to the first twelve but to all whom He might call and choose and send.

To that point, allow me to expound on two more passages.

The first is found in Luke 10 – with his being the only gospel account that shares this detail (though that makes sense in light of the two books Luke wrote and their focus). To set the scene, Jesus had just been dealing with those making excuses regarding becoming one of His disciples. I am going to include the entirety of His specific orders in order to help highlight the theme:

Now after this the Lord appointed seventy others and sent them in pairs ahead of Him to every city and place where He Himself was going to come. And He was saying to them, “The harvest is plentiful, but the laborers are few; therefore beseech the Lord of the harvest to send out laborers into His harvest. Go; behold, I “send” you out as lambs in the midst of wolves. Carry no money belt, no bag, no shoes; and greet no one on the way. Whatever house you enter, first say, ‘Peace be to this house.’ If a man of peace is there, your peace will rest on him; but if not, it will return to you. Stay in that house, eating and drinking what they give you; for the laborer is worthy of his wages. Do not keep moving from house to house. Whatever city you enter and they receive you, eat what is set before you; and heal those in it who are sick, and say to them, ‘The kingdom of God has come near to you.’ But whatever city you enter and they do not receive you, go out into its streets and say, ‘Even the dust of your city which clings to our feet we wipe off in protest against you; yet be sure of this, that the kingdom of God has come near.’ I say to you, it will be more tolerable in that day for Sodom than for that city. Woe to you, Chorazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! For if the miracles had been performed in Tyre and Sidon which occurred in you, they would have repented long ago, sitting in sackcloth and ashes. But it will be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon in the judgment than for you. And you, Capernaum, will not be exalted to heaven, will you? You will be brought down to Hades!

“The one who listens to you listens to Me, and the one who rejects you rejects Me; and he who rejects Me rejects the One who sent Me.”

The seventy returned with joy, saying, “Lord, even the demons are subject to us in Your name.” Luke 10:1-17

No names of these ones sent with specific orders and authority were given to us. We know their orders and we know their accomplishments – and that is enough!

We know from the Word that He gave some who are sent away with specific orders, but that we are not all asked to act as envoys in that way. We know that Jesus laments over Jerusalem for killing those sent to her with specific tasks and words. And that He will send forth His messengers at the end with orders to gather His chosen.

And from Romans 10:14-15, we know:

How then will they call on Him in Whom they have not believed? How will they believe in Him Whom they have not heard? And how will they hear without a herald? How will they proclaim unless they are sent with specific tasks and the authority and power to complete them? Just as it is written: “How beautiful are the feet of those who announce the good news of good things!”

I will end with a quick summary, but just before that I want to remind us that not all who claim to have been given orders from the Lord and to having the power and authority to execute those orders are as they seem. In the letters to the seven cities and those who gather together in His name there, we are told specifically by Jesus that:

“I know your deeds and your toil and perseverance, and that you cannot tolerate evil men, and you put to the test those who call themselves ones whom I have sent, and they are not, and you found them false; and you have endured for My name’s sake and have not grown weary.

“Yet this you do have, that you hate the deeds of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate. He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the congregations.”Rev.2:2-3,6-7

We too should seek discernment; we should know His standards and not be shy about holding ourselves and others to them! And we should strongly reject the actions that promote taking victory over the people of God.

What if, when we read the New Testament and specifically the stories of those called and chosen, instructed and empowered, we understand what it means to be sent by our Lord. What if we are confident in our ability to identify those who truly have been given specific orders from the Lord, in part because He would not give the orders without also giving the power and authority to accomplish them. And what if, any time we see the word “apostle” in our Bibles, we allow ourselves to reframe the meaning of that word, rather than to allow the transliteration to dilute the Lord’s intent.

[Let me say, one more time, in an attempt to remove all doubt about my Trust in the Lord and His Word that it is my absolute conviction that the Holy Spirit inspired the original writings of both the Old and New Testaments. That He also has shepherded the process of selecting, securing, and eventually translating the scriptures for the purpose of giving us the story of God’s plan. It (the written Word of God) is, in fact, the “open” (or unsealed) version of the contract that God made within Himself that defines how He has chosen to interact with His creation within the confines of time. And therefore, within its pages are the fundamental concepts that definitively communicate His desires for His creation, both within time and in eternity-after.]