-
JBL 105/1 (1986) 75-96
THE ORIGIN OF THE NT APOSTLE-CONCEPT: A REVIEW OF RESEARCH
FRANCIS H. AGNEW, C M . Kenrick Seminary, St. Louis, MO
63119
Before its use in the Christian scriptures the word apostlos had
an extremely meager history in secular Greek.1 This history is
bound up with the experience of seafaring and is not closely
related to Christian usage.2 Only in Herodotus, who employs it
twice in the sense of messenger (1.21; 4.38), does nonbiblical
Greek show some relationship to that of the NT. OT Greek is not
much more productive of information on the origins of Chris-tian
usage The LXX and Symmachus each have the word once, also in the
sense of messenger.3 Against this background it comes as something
of a surprise to discover the term apostlos eighty times in the NT.
It is found in most of the NT books and across the time span that
they represent, with concentration in Paul (35x) and Luke (34x),
near the beginning and end of the period.4
Terms that rise to importance with a movement are ordinarily of
special significance to it, and it is clear from NT usage that this
is true of the term apostlos.5 There are NT texts that employ the
word with technical
1 LSJ gives a fairly complete listing. The word does not appear
in the pertinent fascicle
of B. Snell-H. J. Mette, Lexikon des frhgriechischen Epos
(Gttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1979-). F. Preisigke-E.
Kiessling, Wrterbuch der griechischen Papyrusurkunden (3 vols.;
Berlin: Privately published, 1925-1931) with its supplementary vol.
(Amsterdam: Hakkert, 1971) provides a considerable number of
references to a secular use of the term in the nonliterary Greek of
Christian times.
2 The word arose as a designation for a kind of transport ship
and came, in turn, to indicate
the dispatch of a fleet, the fleet itself, a naval expedition,
the admiral of such an expedition, a passport, a bill of lading,
etc. For a fairly thorough review of recorded usage, see K. H.
Rengstorf, "Apostlos" TDNT 1. 407-8.
3 The LXX at 1 Kgs 14:6; Symmachus at Isa 18:1. Josephus, more
or less contemporaneous
with the NT, has it twice in the sense of a sending of
emissaries, Ant 1, 146; 17, 30 (but the first text is
uncertain).
4 Moulton-Geden (excluding variants) shows incidence as follows:
Paul: 35 times, includ-
ing 1 Thessalonians: 1, 1 Corinthians: 10, 2 Corinthians: 7,
Galatians: 3, Romans: 3, Philip-pians: 1, Colossians: 1, Ephesians:
4, Pastorals: 5; Luke: 34 times, including Luke: 6, Acts: 28,
otherwise 11 times, including once each in Mark, Matthew, John,
Hebrews, 1 Peter, and Jude; twice in 2 Peter; and 3 times in
Revelation.
5 For discussion of the factors that promoted the choice of this
term with references to
75
-
76 Journal of Biblical Literature
and solemn theological significance as a designation for leading
figures of early Christian times. The importance of these figures
is paramount: they are a crucial factor in the life of the NT
church for Paul, for Luke, and for the later NT.e
Modern study of apostleship began in 1865 with the publication
of J. B. Lightfoot's commentary on Galatians and its excursus "The
Name and Office of Apostle."7 Since then the subject has remained a
source of continu-ing fascination to NT scholars. A veritable flood
of literature has been produced with divergent and often
contradictory opinion advanced on all of its many problems,8
representative of practically every trend in contem-porary theology
and exegesis.9
Although most of these problems lie beyond the immediate
interest of this paper, several must be mentioned here for the sake
of orientation. It is now generally agreed, though with
considerable variation in detail, that the NT uses the word
apostlos with some variety of meaning. Chief
literature and a proposal developed from the papyrus evidence,
see F. Agnew, "On the Origin of the Term Apostlos," CBQ 38 (1976)
49-53.
6 For Paul, apostleship heads the list of charisms in 1 Cor
12:29-31 and is the title most
expressive of his own vocation (1 Cor 1:1; 9:1; 15:1-11; Gal
1:1, 15-16; Rom 1:1; etc.), a title to be jealously guarded and
sharply defended (Galatians 1-2; 2 Corinthians 10-12). For Luke,
the apostles are the leaders of the Jerusalem church, official
witnesses to the lifetime of Jesus, responsible for the spread of
the gospel throughout the world (Luke 24:47-48; Acts 1:7-8, 13-14,
21-22, 26). In the deutero-Pauline imprisonment letters they are
the foundation of the church (Eph 2:20; 3:5). In the Pastorals,
Petrines, and Jude, the apostle is the guarantor of the tradition,
the source of sound teaching and sound praxis; see the greetings of
these letters et passim.
7 St. Pauls Epistle to the Galatians (10th ed.; Grand Rapids:
Zondervan, 1957) 92-100.
8 Extensive listing of older literature will be found in
Rengstorf's now classic article for
TDNT (1933, see n. 2 above). The Literaturnachantrge of TWNT
10/2 (1979) adds six cols, of materials from the period 1934 to
1977. Each subsequent number of EBB and IZBG lists later additions
to this now immense collection.
9 There is no full-length bibliographical study of this
material. A number of shorter studies
aiming at survey of the whole question have appeared, among
which may be mentioned: O. Linton, Das Problem der Urkirche in der
neueren Forschung (Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1932) 66-101, a
discriminating chapter on the older research; F. M. Braun, Aspects
nouveaux du problme de Vglise (Fribourg: Libraire de l'universit,
1942) 68-80; A. Verheul, "De moderne exgse over apostlos" Sacris
Erudiri 1 (1948) 176-83; E. M. Kredel, "Der Apostel-begriff in der
neueren Exegese," ZKT 78 (1956) 169-93, 257-305, the most
comprehensive survey to the date indicated, if somewhat weak in its
sampling of the then more recent literature; G. Klein, Die zwlf
Apostel Ursprung und Gestalt einer Idee (FRLANT 59; Gttingen:
Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1961) 20-62, useful but tendentious in
classification and perspective; J. B. Roloff,
Apostolat-Verkndigung-Kirche (Gtersloh: Mohn, 1965) 9-37, very
careful and full of insight; E. Gttgemanns, "Literatur zur neu
testamentlichen Theo-logie," VF 12 (1967) 61-79; R. Schnackenburg,
"Apostolicitythe Present Position of Studies," One in Christ 6
(1970) 243-73, which is more concerned with systematic and
ecumenical issues; A. Lemaire, "The Ministries in the New
Testament: Present Research," BTB 3 (1973) 140-43, concise but
questionably nuanced; J. A. Kirk, "Apostleship since Rengstorf:
Towards a Synthesis," NTS 21 (1974-75) 249-64, also somewhat
tendentious.
-
Agnew: The NT Apostle-Concept 77
interest here is in its solemn technical sense, but the whole
range of usage is significant to the discussion.10 The exact
character of apostleship is debated. Described as a general NT
phenomenon in a way that would win broad approval, the apostle is
one who, through a vision of the risen Lord, has become an official
witness to his resurrection and who has been commis-sioned by him
to preach the gospel in a way fundamental to its spread.11 But
granting this, it is now recognized also that even the major NT
witnesses, Paul and Luke, do not present an entirely unified view
of its meaning.12
10 Almost all scholars would agree that it sometimes appears in
the simple, nontechnical
sense of messenger, as in a text like John 13:6. Some see only
this nontechnical usage alongside the solemn usage; see, e.g., H.
von Gampenhausen, "Der urchristliche Apostelbegriff," ST 1 (1947)
104-5; Verheul, "Kent Sint Paulus buiten 'de twaalf nog andere
Aposteln?" Studia Catholica 22 (1947) 65-75, 23 (1948) 145-57,
217-29; J. C. Margot, "Lapostolat dans le Nouveau Testament," VCaro
11 (1957) 216-17; Klein, Zwlf Apostel, 54; W. Schmithals, The
Office of Apostle in the Early Church (Nashville and New York:
Abingdon, 1969) 58-95. Others, probably with better arguments, see
a range of usages between the nontechnical use and the solemn use;
see, e.g., Rengstorf, "Apostlos" 422-23; . L. Schmidt, "Le ministre
et les ministres dan l'Eglise du Nouveau Testament," RHPB 17 (1937)
332-33; A. Fridrichsen, The Apostle and His Message (UUA 1947:3;
Uppsala: Lundquistska, 1947) 7, 18-19; H. Mosbech, "Apostlos in the
New Testament," ST 2 (1948) 170-72; L. Cerfaux, The Christian in
the Theology of St Paul (London: Chapman, 1967) Ul-15; C. K.
Barrett, The Signs of an Apostle (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1972)
71-73; U. Brockhaus, Charisma und Amt (Wuppertal: Brockhaus, 1972)
112-16; F. Hahn, "Der Apostolat im Urchristentum," KD 20 (1974)
56-61.
11 R. E. Brown notes: "The two major constituents in being'an
apostle of Jesus Christ* . . .
seem to have been (1) a vision of the risen Jesus . . . ; (2) a
commission by Jesus to preach" ("The Twelve and the Apostolati" JBC
2. 798). See also Hahn, "Apostolat," 56-60. The views of these
scholars are representative. Membership in the apostolic group is
uncertain. Most scholars would now maintain a more extensive group
than the twelve and Paul, though the identity of the others remains
a problem. Some would deny that the twelve were apostles in any
historical sense. For discussion see Roloff, Apostolat, 57-82. Most
would maintain that the group was closed, though some continue to
think of it as open. For discussion see Brockhaus, Charisma,
112-116; Hahn, "Apostolat," 56-61.
12 That Paul and Luke are in general agreement on the
description given above may be
verified from the texts listed in n. 6, but they differ in
detail. Luke introduces the qualification that the apostle must
have been witness to Jesus from the earliest days of his ministry
(Acts 1:21-22). This would exclude Paul, and in fact he is only
once called apostle in Acts (14:4, 14), probably in a semitechnical
sense. Paul would hardly have been willing to admit such a
qualification. On the differences between Paul and Luke, see H.
Schrmann, Das Lukas-evangelium (HTKNT 3/1; Freiburg: Herder, 1969)
314-15. Schnackenburg comments on this whole question: "In this
discussion, in the course of which many modified definitions have
been brought forward, one fact becomes constantly more clear: in
the New Testament we have no unified concept of the 'apostle' but
rather a number of definitions which seem to stand in contradiction
to one another. The clearest conceptions are to be found in Paul
and Luke . . ." ("Apostolicity," 246). S. Dockx attempts to evade
this problem by arguing that the primary characteristic of
apostleship for Paul and Luke is authoritative leadership of a
mission and that the two characteristics mentioned above represent
a broader and less authentic usage, admitted by Paul in the heat of
argument with his adversaries ("Evolution smantique du terme
aptre," Chronologies notestamentaire et vie de Vglise primitive
[Paris: Duculot, 1976] 255-63). But the premises of this position
are very questionable. The
-
78 Journal of Biblical Literature
Finally, it follows from what has been said that apostleship
must be re-garded as a phenomenon of the post-Easter period.13
The following paper deals with only a small part of the general
research on apostleship, its linguistic and religionsgeschichtlich
back-grounds, the derivation of the concept apostle in its
Christian sense. Though not so crucial to the overall discussion,
this topic is yet quite fundamental to it.14 Such study represents
the first step toward the under-standing of the whole subject,
providing a context in which the more sig-nificant aspects of
apostleshipits historical character, theological value, etc.can be
discussed and understood.15
Research on this subject has produced a surprising range of
opinion.16
differences between Paul and Luke noted above are points well
made against any uncritical reading of the texts, but there is
perhaps a tendency at present to give less attention than is
deserved to the wide areas of agreement within the NT on the
character of apostleship. The points upon which the major witnesses
agree should not be minimalized, however their differences are to
be approached.
13 An older scholarship with an inadequate view of the Gospel as
a literary type traced
apostleship to the earthly Jesus on the basis of such texts as
Luke 6:13 and Matt 10:2. A more contemporary view regards such
texts as a projection of post-Easter vocabulary on the life-time of
Jesus; see especially J. Dupont, "Le nom d'aptres a-t-il donn aux
douze par Jesus," Lorient chrtien 1 (1956) 266-90, 425-44. However,
many earlier scholars look upon Jesus' choice and sending of the
twelve as an anticipation of apostleship; see Rengstorf,
"Apostlos," 424-30. In fact, the historical reality of the choice
and sending of the twelve was once seri-ously questioned; see
especially P. Vielhauer, "Gottesreich und Menschensohn," in
Festschrift fr Gnter Dehn (Neukirchen: Moers, 1957) 51-79. But,
with the decline of historical skepti-cism signaled by the
fundamental consensus now reached on the Jesus-of-history question,
the position represented by Rengstorf has been reasserted; see H.
Kraft, "Die Anfnge des geistlichen Amts," TLZ100 (1975) 85-86; . .
Schelkle, "Charisma und Amt," TQ 159 (1979) 249-51. For review of
this whole question see Roloff, Apostolat, 138-68.
14 Roloff, Apostolat, 10.
15 There is currently no full bibliographical study of this
question. H. Hola, "H. Rengstorf s
[sic] Konzeption des ntl. Apostolats und ihre Auswirkung in der
protestantische Literatur vor dem IL Vat. Konzil," [German title of
Polish original] Analecta Cracoviensia 9 (1977) 165-206, appears to
deal with this material partially [abstract, IZBG 26 (1979/80)
184].
16 Scholarship is in general agreement on the fact that neither
the language nor the culture
of the contemporary Greek-speaking world provides any
significant basis for Christian developments. The rarity of the
substantive apostlos in any sense like that of the NT has already
been noted. Although there are occasional uses of the verbal form
apostelleinwhich, as Rengstorf ("Apostlos," 398) says, implies " .
. . a commission bound up with the one sent" secular Greek offers
only a hint of NT usage. Neither do any of the numerous itinerant
philosophical and religious figures of the time (on which see M.
Albertz, Die Botschaft des Neuen Testament 1/2 [Zurich: Zollikon,
1951] 39-40) provide a significant type for the NT apostle. There
is a certain parallelism with the cynic-stoic kataskopos tn then,
("heavenly inspector"), but Rengstorf, who has studied the figure
carefully, concludes that the likeness is at best formal and this
is the usual position of research ("Apostlos," 410-11); see G.
Wetter, Der Sohn Gottes (FRLANT 26; Gttingen: Vandenhoeck &
Ruprecht, 1916) 27; K. Deissner, "Das Sendungsbewusstsein der
Urchristenheit," ZST 7 (1929/30) 786; G. Sass, Apostelamt und
Kirche (Munich: Kaiser, 1939) 12; A. Wikenhauser, "Apostel," RAC 1.
554; Schmithals, Office, 100-102.
-
Agnew: The NT Apostle-Concept 79
Its development can be sketched in three phases. Earlier
scholarship, quite diversified in general theological outlook,
traced the origin of the NT apostle-concept to the sending
convention of OT and rabbinic Judaism with particular reference to
the slah-ftgure which emerges with some degree of clarity in the
rabbinic period. This position was dominant through the first half
of the twentieth century and has never been without defenders.
However, it has always had opponents and during the middle decades
of the century met serious opposition from a large group of
scholars, also quite diversified in theological outlook, who rather
trace the apostle-concept to the Christian experience or, in one
case, to gnostic sources. During this period the notion of a
Christian origin of the concept came to prevail. After these
challenges, more contemporary research has returned, if with
qualifi-cation, to the theory of the Jewish origin of the concept,
though the theory of Christian origins still finds defenders.
The development of opinion is sketched below in the three phases
sug-gested with concentration on the work of writers who have
contributed to it more significantly.
I. Origin of the Apostle-Concept in the Sending-Conventions of
OT and Rabbinic Judaism
Lightfoot was the first to draw the attention of modern
scholarship to a certain parallelism existing between the NT
apostle and a figure of late rabbinic Judaism designated slah, sent
man.17 The contributions of sev-eral writers mark stages in the
development of this theory. Their studies are primarily influenced
by the image of the apostle in the NT narrative litera-ture. After
Lightfoot the parallelism of the slah- and apostle-figures was
further evidenced in the work of A. von Harnack and S. Kraus,
largely in the addition of further details to the comparison. H.
Vogelstein put the discussion on a more solid basis with the
contention that the relationship of the two figures was to be
discovered primarily in a comparison of their formal elements
rather than in comparison of their concrete phenomeno-logical
characteristics. Both figures, however they may differ, involve the
same formal sending-convention, which Vogelstein maintained could
be traced far back into the OT period. Rengstorf has given the most
thoroughly elaborated version of this theory, adding depth by study
of its linguistic backgrounds and of significant phenomenological
likenesses. A later essay of H. von Campenhausen may be regarded as
marking the conclusion of
17 Galatians, 93-94: "With the later Jews . . . and it would
appear also with the Jews of
the Christian era, the word was in common use. It was the title
borne by those who were dispatched from the mother city by the
rulers of the race on any foreign mission. . . . Thus in
designating his immediate disciples 'Apostles,' our Lord was not
introducing a new term but adopting one which from its current
usage would suggest to his hearers the idea of a highly responsible
mission."
-
80 Journal of Biblical Literature
the first phase of research and the opening to later thought on
the question. The general opinion of these writers was widely
shared.18
To show the relationship that they claim between apostlos and
saltati, these scholars investigate the latter phenomenon as it
appears in three settings: in the rabbinic and related materials,
where it first emerges clearly; in its OT roots; and in the NT
itself. This pattern, basically that of Rengstorf, can be used to
provide a more detailed review of their position.
The substantive slah is not found in the OT and came to
prominence in the rabbinic period. It is abundantly witnessed in
the Talmud with technical implication to describe a commissioned
agent, one sent to act in the name of another. Such agents served
in private and in institutionalized capacities. As a private agent
the slah might, for example, contract an engagement of marriage,
manage a divorce proceeding, slaughter the paschal lamb, etc., in
the name of a principal. As an institutional agent, he might
undertake liturgical actions or represent the Jerusalem
authorities
18 A. von Harnack, The Mission and Expansion of Christianity (2d
ed.; New York: Harper,
1962) 327-31; S. Kraus, "Die jdischen Apostel," JQR 17 (1905)
370-83; idem, "Apostel," Encjud (1927) 3. 1-10; H. Vogelstein, "Die
Entstehung und Entwicklung des Apostolates in Judentum," MGWJ 49
(1905) 427-99; idem, "The Development of the Apostolate in Judaism
and its Transformation in Christianity," HUCA 2 (1925) 99-123;
Rengstorf, "Apostlos" 413-24; von Campenhausen, "Apostelbegriff,"
97-104; idem, Ecclesiastical Authority and Spiritual Power (London:
Black, 1969) 22.
This position is widely represented in dictionary articles; see
W. Mndel, RGG (2d ed.) 1. 434-35; H. Riesenfeld, RGG (3d ed.) 1.
497; Schelkle, UTK (2d ed.) 1. 735; G. Kredel, Sacramentum Verbi
(ed. J. B. Bauer; New York: Herder & Herder, 1970) 1. 33; X.
Lon-Dufour, Dictionary of Biblical Theology (1st ed.; New York:
Descle, 1967) 19; M. H. Shepherd, IDB 1. 171. It is also commonly
supported in monograph and essay literature; see W. Seufert, Der
Ursprung und die Bedeutung des Apostles (Leiden: Brill, 1887) 8-14;
E. Meyer, Ursprung und Anfnge des Christentums (Stuttgart:
Cotta'sche, 1921) 1. 265-67; R. Schtz, Apostel und Jnger (Giessen:
Tpelmann, 1921) 8-9; J. Wagenmann, Die Stellung des Apostels Paulus
neben den Zwlf in den ersten drei Jahrhunderten (BZNW 3; Giessen:
Tpelmann, 1926) 23; F. Gaven, "Schaliach and Apostlos," ATR 9
(1927) 250-59; K. Lake, "The Twelve and the Apostles," in The
Beginnings of Christianity, Vol. 5 (ed. F. J. Foakes Jackson and K.
Lake; Grand Rapids: Baker, 1965/66) 46; G. Dix, "The Ministry in
the Early Church," The Apostolic Ministry (ed. . E. Kirk; London:
Hodder & Stoughton, 1946) 227-30; idem, "The Christian Shaliach
and the Jewish ApostleA Reply," Theology 51 (1948) 249-56; S.
Hanson, The Unity of the Church in the New Testament (Lund:
Almqvist & Wiksell, 1946) 33-37, 91-94; Albertz, Botschaft,
1/2. 42-45; Mosbech, "Apostlos," 168-69; E. Lohse, "Ursprung und
Prgung des christlichen Apostolates," TZ 9 (1953) 260-65; Barrett,
"The Apostles in and After the New Testament," SE 21 (1956) 30;
idem, Signs, 12-15; J. Colson, Les fonctions ecclsiales aux deux
premier sicles (Textes et tudes thologiques; Paris: Descle de
Brouwer, 1956) 11-19; idem, "La succession apostolique au niveau du
premire sicle," VCaro 15 (1961) 138-41; Dupont, "Le nom d'aptres,"
270-71 n. 7, 272 n. 9; Margot, "L'apostolat," 138-41; A. T. Hanson,
The Pioneer Ministry (London: SCM, 1961) 9-10; F. Neugebauer, In
Christus (Gttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1961) 113-19, with
careful qualification; P. Blser, "Zum Problem des urchristlichen
Apostolates," Uni Christi-anorum (Jaeger Fs.; Paderborn:
Bonifacius, 1962) 105-6; F. Klostermann, Das christliche Apostolat
(Innsbruck: Tyrolia, 1962) 66; A. G. Hebert, Apostle and Bishop
(London: Faber & Faber, 1963) 22-23.
-
Agnew: The NT Apostle-Concept 81
to the Jews of the Diaspora.19 This last example of the
phenomenon is clearly institutional in character. It is witnessed
in a series of Christian and Roman texts which translate slah as
apostolos/apostolus.20 The general signifi-cance of the
SZi^-convention may be gauged from the frequently repeated legal
maxim "The-one-whom-a man-sends [slah] is like the man himself." It
is this maxim, variously realized, sometimes for private sometimes
for institutional purposes, which forms the background of the
Christian apostle-concept for the writers here surveyed.
The sZia/i-convention is significant for the Christian
apostolate in its formal element. It is the relationship between
sender and sent, not the content of the commission given, that is
primarily important. The slah is the authoritative representative,
the surrogate of the one who sends him, within the limits of the
commission given. His status as slah is entirely determined by this
relationship, and it is in this respect only that he is empowered
to act. Volgelstein was the first to call attention to this fact,
and it has been repeated by most scholars after him, especially by
Rengstorf.21
This is a legalprimarily secularnot a religious convention.22
Still, as the examples given above suggest, the commission of the
slah was often enough specifically religious or invested with
religious overtones. In these instances, reference is always to a
human sender, and the act of sending is never ascribed to God,
though the title is applied to figures who were in fact divinely
commissioned. Priestly and prophetic figures of great importance
are so designated; however, the title is never used of Jewish
missionary figures.23
A matter of major significance is the dating of the slah
phenomenon. It is clear that the institutionalized form mentioned
above cannot have ante-dated the destruction of Jerusalem.24
Further, no document using the word can be dated earlier than the
canonical literature. The talmudic materials cited above took shape
in the second century and the Christian and Roman texts mentioned
are fourth-century or later. This fact is recognized and
19 Examples with comment are conveniently gathered in Rengstorf,
"Apostlos" 414-20;
StrB, 3. 2-3. 20
These texts are conveniently gathered in Harnack, Mission,
327-30; Schmithals, Office, 98-100.
21 "Entstehung," 428; see Linton, Problem der Urkirche, 92;
Rengstorf, "Apostlos," 414-15:
" . . the point of the designation . . . is . . . simply
assertion of the form of sending, i.e., of authorization. This is
the decisive thing."
22 See Rengstorf, "Apostlos," 418: "The term is legal . . . and
if the shaliach has religious
significance this is . . . because . . . he is entrusted with a
religious task"; von Campenhausen, "Apostelbegriff," 99. For
analysis of the Slah institution from a strictly legal point of
view, see M. Cohn, "Die Stellvertretung im jdischen Recht,"
Zeitschrift fr vergleichende Rechtswissenschaft 36 (1920) 124-213,
354-460. Something of the kind appears in a variety of cultures;
see, eg., A. Watson, Contracts of Mandate in Roman Law (Oxford:
Clarendon, 1961).
23 See Rengstorf, "Apostlos," 418-20; Dix, "Christian Shaliach,"
256 n. 2.
24 See Vogelstein, "Entstehung," 438; Rengstorf, "Apostlos,"
417.
-
82 Journal of Biblical Literature
admitted by the defenders of the theory. On the other hand, they
note that documentation for this period is sketchy and that the
talmudic material is certainly representative of an earlier period
than its documentation.25
Despite the reservations implied in the last two paragraphs, the
vast majority of these scholars undoubtedly see a direct link
between these slah-ngures and the Christian apostle, in such a way
that the latter is derived from the former, conceived as concretely
existing phenomena of the NT period. Efforts to trace the roots of
the slah-convention in the OT and to discover traces of it in the
NT (see below) are based on this conclusion.
To support their position, the proponents of this theory attempt
to trace this rabbinical practice into the OT period.26 They call
attention to the frequent use of the verbal root slh in the OT,
rendered about seven hundred times in the LXX by (ex-)apostellein.
This root often expresses the notion of sending with a special
mission, authorization, or responsibility with particular reference
to the sender.27 The usage is secular in origin. God is the sender
in only about one-quarter of these texts. But it is employed in
connection with significant religious phenomena and ". . . has an
assured place in most important religious contexts. . . ."28 This
verbal usage is taken as a semitechnical anticipation of what later
crystallized in the slah-convention and institution.29 Its use in
connection with the prophets is particularly significant,
especially in view of the fact that Paul uses the prophetic
vocation as a model for the description of apostolic
vocation.30
25 See E Lohse, Die Ordination im Spatjudentum und im Neuen
Testament (Gottingen
Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1951) 51 "Die Institution des
judischen Apostolates ist alt In der neutestamentlichen Zeit ist
jedenfalls das shaZiac/i-Institut in Judentum berall be-kannt", and
so commonly among the defenders of this theory
26 The word itself does not appear m the OT The single
appearance of apostlos m LXX,
1 Kgs 14 6, renders a participial form slah 27
See Rengstorf, "Apostlos," 400-401 "The emphasis rests on the
fact of sending m con-junction with the one who sends, not on the
one who is sent slh is less a statement concerning the mission than
a statement concerning its initiator and his concern, the one who
is sent is of interest only to the degree that m some measure he
embodies m his existence as such the one who sends him Even in the
consciousness of the bearer of the commission the emphasis lies on
its author
28 See Rengstorf, "Apostlos," 402
29 See Rengstorf, "Apostlos," 400-403
30 A small group of writers accept this theory of the origin of
the apostle-concept only
insofar as the prophet can be considered a Slah-ftgaie, so E
Haupt, Zum Verstndnis des Apostolates im Neuen Testament (Halle
Niemeyer, 1895/96) 106-10, H Windisch, Paulus und Christus (Leipzig
Hinnchs, 1934) 147-53, Wikenhauser, "Apostel," 555, E Pax,
EPIP&ANEIA (Munich Zmk, 1955) 206-7 Others think that only the
name of the rabbinic slah is important for the NT apostle-concept,
the theological roots being located m the OT idea of prophetic
vocation, so Albertz, Botschaft, 1/2 43, Prumm, Diakonia Pneumatos
(Rome Herder, 1960) 1 121, 125 But it is more common to see the
prophet, rabbinic slah, and apostle as links m a continuing chain
of conceptual development, so Rengstorf, "Apost-los," 438-41 and
most of the writers named m 18 above There is considerable
literature on the parallelism between the vocation of the OT
prophets and the apostleship of Paul,
-
Agnew: The NT Apostle-Concept 83
Whether the convention itself can be traced to OT times is
debated.31 Finally, the defenders of this theory attempt to show
that the evidence
of the NT supports it, both at the linguistic and at the
phenomenological levels. From this most important of sources, they
attempt to show the cur-rency of the sZiafr-convention in the early
Christian period and its concrete realization in the Christian
apostle.
In a little-noted but careful and solid piece of research H.
Bruders calls attention to NT use of apostellein.32 In the majority
of cases, this verb conveys not just the simple idea of sending but
also that of commission. In this respect it preserves the
characteristic connotation that it has in the OT/LXX.33 The
appearance of the substantive apostlos is easily explained as a
derivative of the cognate verbal form in this characteristic
sense.34 Once again it should be noted that this usage is not
specifically religious, though it often has profound religious
implication.35
Very significant for all these writers is what they take to be
the appear-ance of the slah/apostolos in a series of NT texts. The
most evident example of this kind is the text of John 13:16 "Amen,
amen I say to you, a servant is not greater than his master nor a
messenger [apostlos] than the one who sent [tou pempsantos] him."
The text recalls the maxim "The one whom a man sends is like the
man himself."36 Two Pauline texts are also put
produced to some extent by writers who deny or take no position
on the theory discussed here; see nn. 59 and 92 below.
31 Vogelstein ("Development") attempts to show that the
SoZuz/i-institution itself can be
traced to the early postexilic period and that it is rooted in
an institution of the contemporary Persian governmental system. His
theory is based entirely on verbal usage which he claims led to the
development of the nominal form in the rabbinic period. This theory
has not won much support.
32 Die Verfassung der Kirche (Forschungen christlichen Literatur
und Dogmengeschichte
4/1-2; Mainz: Kirchheim, 1904) 18-29, 336-48. 33
Bruders, Verfassung, 20: "Das wort apostell gibt also durch
seinen Literalsinn an, dass der . . . Auftraggeber an den Orte, wo
er seine . . . Gesandten hat, durch letztere seine Befehle und
Wnsche ausfhren lasst"; Rengstorf, "Apostlos," 406.
34 Bruders, Verfassung, 344-45. It is probable that this
sending-convention is also expressed
in the NT by pempein, especially in the Fourth Gospel; see
Rengstorf, "Apostlos," 403-6. 35
See Rengstorf, "Apostlos," 406; Bruders notes of such texts that
they show "wie tief der Gedanke einer 'sichtbaren Vertretung Gottes
auf Erden' in der neuen Lehre Wurzel gefasst hatte" (Verfassung,
21).
36 See von Campenhausen, "Apostelbegriff," 101: "Es ist
allgemein zugestanden, dass hier
mit dem apostlos schlecterdings nicht ein Trger des christlichen
'Apostelamtes' als solcher gemeint sein kann. . . . Der Evangelist
lsst Jesus vielmehr eine ganz allgemeine Sentenz, einer
annerkannten Rechtsgrundsatz aussprechen, den er auf sich und seine
Jnger lediglich anwendet: ein Bevollmchtiger kann niemals mehr
vorstellen als der, der ihn 'gesandt'. . ."; Rengstorf, "Apostlos,"
421; Mosbech, "Apostlos," 170; Lohse, "Ursprung," 261. Several
syn-optic texts are often understood in the same way, e.g., Mark
6:30; Luke 11:49, but opinion is less certain than in the case of
John 13:16. Besides such passages in which 8-%8 are (or may be)
given the name apostlos, a variety of other passages are adduced as
evidence
-
84 Journal of Biblical Literature
forward as evidence The apostoloi ekklesin of 2 Cor 8:23 and
Epaphro-ditus, hymn apostolon, of Phil 2:25 are hardly apostles of
Christ in the fullest sense; they are, rather, the sent men of the
community.37
But, what is most significant, these scholars maintain that the
clearest proof of their theory is the general image of the apostle
found in the NT. There the apostle is consistently presented as one
sent and empowered to act in the name of another, on whom his whole
situation as apostle depends and to whom he is responsible for the
fulfillment of his appointed task. In this respect they are
primarily influenced by the NT narrative literature, especially
Luke-Acts, whatever the historical value of the texts in which Luke
uses the word apostle.38 But they would also see the same basic
pattern realized in the solemn usage of Paul.39 Many would maintain
that the Johannine commission texts, which frequently use the verbs
apostellein/ pempein, imply knowledge of the same ideas.40
Evidently NT usage so understood involves a supreme
phenomenological deepening of the formal sending-convention
represented by the legal maxim "The one whom a man sends is like
the man himself."
This position might be summarized as follows: The
sltaft-convention appears clearly in the rabbinic period. As
commissioned and sent to act for another, each figure so named is
formally like every other, whatever the specific task undertaken.
The basic sending-convention at the root of the concept involves a
strong sense of solidarity between sender and sent. Although the
concept is formally secular and legal, it could be and often was
employed in a religious context. This convention was already used
in the NT period, although the word slah cannot be clearly traced
in the literary remains of the time. There is considerable evidence
for its origin in the OT period. This evidence is to be found in
the at least semitechnical OT sending-convention expressed in the
verbal use of the root slh. It is also evidenced in the NT in a
variety of ways. The NT use of apostellein, the use of the word
apostlos of slah-Rgares, and the general description of
of early Christian awareness of the SZift-convention; see
Bruders, Verfassung, 20-21; Rengstorf, "Apostlos," 426; von
Campenhausen, "ApostelbegrifF," 102-3.
37 See von Campenhausen, "Apostelbegriff," 102: "Es handelt sich
hier einfach um bevoll-
mchtigte Gemeindevertreter, jdisch gesprochen um Slhm"; and so
most of the writers named in the previous note.
38 See Vogelstein, "Development," 113-14; Rengstorf, "Apostlos,"
425; Colson, Fonctions
ecclsiales, 14. Most of these writers would regard the use of
the word apostlos in its full Christian sense (especially in Luke)
as a retrojection of post-Easter language upon the life-time of
Jesus.
39 Rengstorf writes of the position of Paul in the apostolic
circle: "It is . . . determined
. . . by his calling to be a messenger in the sense of the
shaliach institution, as in the case of the other apostoloi"
("Apostlos," 441); see Lohse, "Ursprung," 271.
40 See Rengstorf, "Apostlos," 434-35, 444-45; Albertz,
Botschaft, 1/2. 57-58; Colson,
Fonctions ecclsiales, 13-14.
-
Agnew: The NT Apostle-Concept 85
the apostle of Christ are factors in this evidence. NT
apostleship represents a singular and profound expression of the
SZiaft-convention.41
II. Origin of the Apostle-Concept in Christianity Itself or in
Gnosticism
In the middle decades of the twentieth century, the position
discussed above met with serious objection. A typical expression of
the problems raised against it may be found in the work of J.
Munck.42 A number of scholars have produced work of particular
significance in this respect. Their studies are primarily
influenced by the image of the apostle found in the authentic
Pauline literature, which, as they observe, represents the earliest
NT witness. An older anticipation of this position is found in the
work of H. Monnier.43 Among more recent writers who have
contributed substan-tially to the development of this position are
A. Ehrhardt, L. Cerfaux, G. Klein, and W. Schmithals. Their views
are also widely shared.44
41 The factors that led to the choice of the word apostlos by
the NT writers are variously
assessed by the writers of this group. Some trace it to an
underlying Semitic usage of Jesus; so Rengstorf ("Apostohs," 429);
and with more reserve, K. H. Schelkle (Discipleship and Priesthood
[New York: Herder & Herder, 1965] 30). Harnack claims that
Hellenistic Jews of the pre-Christian era had already adapted it as
a translation of Slah and that it was taken over from them by
Christians, but he offers no evidence for this position (Mission,
327 n. 2). Von Campenhausen maintains that the usage witnessed by
Herodotus had survived into the koine and was taken over by
Christians ("Apostelbegriff," 100). He cites a series of texts to
show that the word would have been understood in the Greek language
in that fundamental sense. This position may be supported by the
fact that the word survived with this sense in secular Greek of the
Christian period; see Agnew, "Origin," 51-53. Still others trace it
to biblical use of apostellein; see Mosbech, "Apostlos," 187-88. It
may be noted that these views are not mutually exclusive
42 "Paul, the Apostles, and the Twelve," ST 3 (1949) 100: "Far
too much importance has for
some time now been attached to these Jewish apostles. . . . The
Christian apostles are part of something entirely new and dynamic
in that the whole Christian religion is something to be spread
abroad. It is not mere chance that this is stressed by a number of
important terms: it is the gospel, the good news which must be
announced (keryss) by heralds. . . . The word apostohs has been
determined by this steady sending forththe mission if one likes, so
characteristic of Christianity. Compared with this, the Jewish use
of the apostolic idea is a rule as far removed from the Christian
usage as a diplomatic envoy is from a missionary to the
heathen."
43 Notion de l'apostolat des origines Irne (Paris: Leroux, 1903)
1-22. Monnier is
interested in showing the totally charismatic character of
apostleship as against the Roman Catholic contention that
apostleship is primarily an office.
44 A. Ehrhardt, The Apostolic Succession in the First Two
Centuries of the Church
(London: Lutterworth, 1953) 15-20; idem, The Apostolic Ministry
(SJT Occasional Papers 7; Edinburgh: Oliver & Boyd, 1958) 4-5;
L. Cerfaux, "Pour l'histoire du titre apostlos dans le Nouveau
Testament," RSR 48 (1960) 76-92; idem, The Christian in the
Theology of St. Paul (New York: Herder & Herder, 1967) 109-10;
Klein, Zwlf Apostel, 22-52 et passim (this is a major monograph on
the question of apostleship from a later member of the Bultmann
school purporting to show that the notion of the twelve apostles is
a Lucan invention based
-
86 Journal of Biblical Literature
The approach of this group consists mainly in criticism of the
previous theory. Rejecting it, they opt for the Christian origin of
the concept on the principle that the new experience of Christians
generated a new leadership figure, the apostle. For the most part
they offer only conjectural explanation of specifics. The notable
exception is W. Schmithals, who develops the theory that the
apostle-concept must be traced ultimately to gnostic sources. The
points sketched here offer a suitable framework for the following
review of research.
The evidence put forward in favor of the slah theory is attacked
at every point. Two particular lines of argumentation are developed
against it: the inadequacy of its documentary evidence and the
phenomenological disparity of slah and apostle.
The supposed development of the slah-convention in the OT period
is denied because of the absence of the substantive form in the OT.
The single appearance of apostlos in the LXX as the rendering of a
participial, not a substantive, form may be without technical
significance and at any rate provides too slight a basis for
support of the claim that the convention was developing45 or
already present in the OT.46 Only W. Schmithals deals with the
issue raised by the OT use of the root slh, particularly in
connec-tion with prophetic sending. He denies that the prophet can
be considered a sZia/i-figure, largely on the basis of the
difference between the profound religious content of prophetic
vocation and the generally far less significant
upon an original Pauline model); Schmithals, Office, 98-110
(this too is a major monograph on apostleship, also from a later
member of the Bultmann school, dealing specifically with the
derivation of the apostle-concept).
This view is represented in several dictionary articles; see A.
Mdebielle, "Apostolat," DBSup 1. 565; J. L. McKenzie, "Apostle,"
Dictionary of the Bible (Milwaukee: Bruce, 1965) 46-47. It is also
supported in monograph and essay literature; see E. Loening, Die
Gemeinde-verfassung des Urchristentums (Halle: Niemeyer, 1888) 33;
P. Batiffol, "Eapostolat," RB 3 (1906) 522; K. Holl, "Der
Kirchenbegriff des Paulus in seinem Verhltnis zu der Urgemeinde,"
Gesammelte Aufstze zur Kirchengeschichte (Tbingen: Mohr-Siebeck,
1928) 2. 52 n. 1; Sass, Apostelamt, 24, with hesitation; . Dahl,
Das Volk Gottes (2d ed.; Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche
Buchgesellschaft, 1963) 189, apparently; E. Ksemann, "Die
Legitimitt des Apostels," ZNW 41 (1942) 51-52, but with
qualification that recognizes the impact of the i/ta/i-convention
on early Christianity; H. St. J. Hart, "Correspondence," Theology
51 (1948) 342-43; J. W. Hunkin, "The Hebrew Word Shaliach "
Theology 51 (1948) 166-70; idem, "Correspondence," Theology 51
(1948) 341-42; G. Lampe, Some Aspects of the New Testa-ment
Ministry (London: SPCK, 1949) 15; C. T. Craig, The One Church in
the Light of the New Testament (New York: Abingdon/Cokesbury, 1951)
58; B. Rigaux, Les ptres aux Thes-saloniciens (EBib; Paris:
Gabalda, 1956) 157; idem, "The Twelve Apostles," Concilium 34
(JL968) 6-7; J. Bonsirven, Le rgne de Dieu (Paris: Aubier, 1957)
191; M. Ashcraft, "Paul's Understanding of Apostleship," Rev Exp 55
(1958) 400-403; E. Schweizer, Church Order in the New Testament
(SBT 32; London: SCM, 1961) 202-3.
45 See Hart, "Correspondence," 342-43; Ehrhardt, Apostolic
Succession, 17; Ashcraft,
"Understanding," 402; Schmithals, Office, 97. 46
Vogelstein's theorizing (see . 31 above) is severely and
pointedly criticized; see Lampe, Aspects, 15; Schmithals, Office,
107.
-
Agnew: The NT Apostle-Concept 87
content of the commission given the slah.47 The significance of
the rab-binic shaliachate is also denied because of its late
attestation. A. Ehrhardt notes that the word slah does not appear
in any document that can be dated earlier than A.D. 140, and this
line of argument is frequently re-peated.48 Schmithals treats the
issue with a nicer degree of precision. He recognizes that it is
the institutional slah that clearly postdates the NT period and
that there is a need to consider the possible influence of the
general legal sending-convention, which cannot be rejected as
providing a basis for apostleship on consideration of dating
alone,49 though he denies its relevance on other grounds. Nor does
the evidence put forward for NT acquaintance with
thesZih-convention fare better. The relevance of such texts as John
13:16, 2 Cor 8:23, Phil 2:25 is denied50 or relativized as
nontechnical.51 Ehrhardt concludes: "Our evidence suggests that the
term apostlos was earlier than the term shaliach. It is therefore
hazardous to use the latter term for the interpretation of the
earlier."52
Besides the criticism of the documentary evidence, these writers
stress repeatedly the absence of true phenomenological parallelism
between the slah-ftgures and the apostle. The most thorough
presentation of this evi-dence is that of W. Schmithals. Starting
from the Pauline literature, he describes apostleship in eighteen
points.53 Later, after describing theslah-figure and convention, he
compares it to this description of apostleship from the authentic
Paul. Some of the more significant elements of the com-parison may
be noted. The importance of the apostle lies always in the
religious order, that of the slah wholly in the juridical. The
function of the apostle is lifelong, that of the slah limited. The
apostle is always a missionary, the slah never. The apostle is an
eschatological figure, but it can hardly be suggested that the slah
has eschatological import. In fact, from a phenomenological point
of view there is little that the two figures have in common.54
Schmithals concludes his survey of differences cate-gorically: "I
should like . . . to assert that the late Jewish legal institution
of the saliach has not even the least to do with the primitive
Christian
47 Office, 107.
48 Apostolic Succession, 17; see H. Monnier, who, criticizing A.
von Harnack, says: "II
prouve l'existence d'une institution du premire sicle par une
texte du second, et il interprte ce texte l'aide d'un crivan du
quatrime" (Notion, 16); Hunkin, "Shaliach," 170; Klein, Zwlf
Apostel, 27.
49 Office, 101-3.
50 See Ashcraft, "Understanding," 402: "As yet no evidence has
been shown that apostlos
was used to translate shaliach, nor has any evidence appeared to
show that Jesus or his followers knew of such an institution."
51 See Schmithals, Office, 109-10. Claims made on the basis of
other texts (see n. 36 above)
are rejected because of the late origin of these texts; see
Klein, Zwlf Apostel, 28-31. 52
Apostolic Succession, 18. 53
Office, 21-57. 54
Office, 103-6.
-
88 Journal of Biblical Literature
apostola te."55 Though very strongly stated, this position is
basic to the writers here surveyed.56
Beyond their rejection of the slah-theory most of these writers
do little more than state their basic position. The apostle is a
figure whose origin is to be traced to the Christian religion.57
Some would allow the influence of the OT, for example, in its use
of slh/apostellein,58 or, especially, in its description of
prophetic vocation.59 But they do not regard these influences as
strong enough to speak of derivation from an OT type. A new
experience has generated the new Christian leadership figurethe
apostle.
W. Schmithals claims otherwise. In the most extensive study ever
devoted to this subject, he claims that the apostle-concept is
derived from gnosticism.60 Schmithals first advanced this position
in a study of gnostic influence on the Corinthian correspondence61
and then in the monograph The Office of Apostle in the Early
Church. This piece has already been cited for its rejection of the
sl ta h- theory, and in this respect it has had con-siderable
influence. But Schmithals's own theory has found little
support.62
55 Office, 105.
56 See Monnier, Notion, 10; "Entre les plnipotentiaires du
Christ et les autres, il y a toute
la diffrence qui spare le message du Christ d'un message
quelconque"; see also 8-16; Lampe, Aspects, 15; Schweizer, Church
Order, 202-3; Klein, Zwlf Apostel, 27.
57 See Monnier, Notion, 9, 22: "Lapostolat chrtien reste chose
originale et neuve. C'est une
institution qui n'a point de racines dans le milieu
judo-hellnique . . . Nous nous con-vaincrons que rien de pareil ne
pouvait exister antrieurement Jsus-Christ. . . ."
58 See Ehrhardt, Apostolic Succession, 19.
59 Several writers of this group have written profoundly on
Pauline usage of texts from the
OT describing prophetic vocation, as, e.g., Gal 1:15-16. See J.
Munck, "La vocation de l'aptre Paul," ST 1 (1947) 131-45; idem,
Paul and the Salvation of Mankind (London: SCM, 1959) 15-27, 48-53;
L. Cerfaux, "S. Paul et le 'Serviteur de Dieu' d'Isaie,"
Miscellanea Biblica et Orientalia A. Miller (Studia Anselmiana
27-28; Rome: Ataneo de S. Anselmo, 1951) Sol-eo; idem, Christian,
72-93, 223-34.
60 Office, 115: "It is one of the remarkable characteristics of
the New Testament research
of the past decades that the attention of the researchers has
not been drawn to that figure who not only actually presents the
precise counterpart of the primitive Christian apostle, and who not
only (like the Christian apostle) is native to the Syrian setting,
but who indeed employed the title 'apostle' as a self-designation
with great emphasis: the Gnostic apostle. . . . The actual function
of the Gnostic apostle is his activity as redeemer. Redemption is
the central concern of the Gnostic religion. An investigation of
the Gnostic thought concerning redemption will thus necessarily
take the Gnostic apostle into consideration, and indeed will treat
of his most essential function."
61 Gnosticism in Corinth: An Investigation of the Letters to the
Corinthians (Nashville:
Abingdon, 1971) 279-82; and see his earlier studies of this
theme: "Die Hretiker in Galatien," ZNW 47 (1956) 25-67; "Die
Irrleherer des Philipperbriefes," ZTK 64 (1957) 297-341; "Zur
Abfassung und ersten Sammlung des paulinischen Hauptbriefe," ZNW 51
(1960) 225-45.
62 He claims that his research is rooted in G. Widengren's
comparative religion studies of
various Near Eastern apostle-figures: The Great Vohu Manah and
the Apostle of God (UU 5; Uppsala: Lundequistska, 1945); The
Ascension of the Apostle and the Heavenly Book (UU 17; Uppsala:
Lundequistska, 1950); Muhammed, the Apostle of God (UU 1; Uppsala:
Lundequistska, 1955).
-
Agnew: The NT Apostle-Concept 89
Schmithals's monograph is impressively organized and developed.
As already noted, he begins with a long description of apostleship
from the Pauline letters. Then recognizing that the concept is not
an original crea-tion of Paul or his churches, he looks elsewhere
for its origins. In a second part of his work Schmithals attempts
to show that the primitive apostle-concept represented in the
Pauline letters is, in fact, the only authentic NT notion of
apostle. He allows the existence of "congregational apostles" as in
2 Cor 8:23 and Phil 2:25, which he connects with the "general use
of the word" as in John 13:16. But he denies that Paul looks upon
the twelve as apostles and considers the use of the word in their
regard (especially in Luke) as late in origin. Syria, not
Jerusalem, is the homeland of the apostle-concept. The Jerusalem
community, Jewish Christianity, cannot be its origin.63
The heart of Schmithals's research is in the third part of his
work. After dispensing with possible derivation of the
apostle-concept from secular Greek usage or from the sZo/i-concept
(see above), he presents his argu-ments for its derivation from
gnosticism. The type of the apostle is the gnostic redeemer-figure
(sent-m an), a frequent though not inevitable element of the
gnostic systems. Among the different representatives of this
general phenomenon he distinguishes two basic typesthe heavenly
redeemer-figure and the earthly redeemer-figurethe former of divine
origin and the latter of human origin. It is the second type that
is particu-larly important for his theory. After describing this
figure in its various manifestations, Schmithals compares the
results of his research with his earlier description of the
Christian apostolate isolated from the Pauline letters. At every
point he finds similarity. The gnostic earthly-redeemer figure is a
member of the community of the "spiritual"; so the Christian
apostle. He undertakes a worldwide mission; so the apostle. His
reception of the gnosis that he communicates is described in the
same terms as the call of the apostle (though he cannot be said to
receive a call in the same sense as the apostle). His reception of
gnosis and his "call" coincide as do conversion and call in the
apostle. Ecstatic experience is a sign and proof of his status, as
with the apostle. His authority is absolute, as that of the
apostle. His work is characterized by eschatological urgency like
that of the apostle (though in a spatial rather than in a temporal
sense). The homeland of this gnostic type is Syriaalso the homeland
of the Christian apostolate.64 Schmithals admits that there is no
extant documentary evidence for the existence of this gnostic
figure from the period of NT origins outside of the NT documents
themselves. He depends heavily upon NT materials for his
characterization of the earthly redeemer-figure, as, for example,
Paul's
63 Office, 58-95.
64 Office, 96-230.
-
90 Journal of Biblical Literature
description of his adversaries in Corinth.65 The word apostlos
is used of the heavenly-redeemer figure with some frequency, though
never in materials earlier than the NT.66 It is used only rarely of
the earthly redeemer-figure and then for the most part in the NT
documents.67
Schmithals's position may be stated sharply in his own words.68
Considering the numerous phenomenological contacts between
redeemer-figure and apostle, ". . . there can be no doubt that the
primitive Christian apostolate was an appropriation of the
missionary office of Jewish or Jewish Christian Gnosticism."
Considering the use of apostlos and apostellein in gnostic
materials and in the Christian documents, "a glance at this
termin-ology should destroy even the last vestige of doubt whether
the apostolate is of gnostic origin. . . ."69
The viewpoint of the scholars whose opinion has been presented
above may be summarized as follows. The slah-theory is
objectionable on two grounds: the inadequacy of the documentary
evidence proposed for it, and the absence of significant concrete
parallelism between the commissioned apostle and the commissioned
slah. The apostle-concept must be traced to its origins in early
Christian experience or, according to Schmithals, to a form of
gnosticism present in the Syrian milieu from which the Pauline
mission took its start.70
III. Reemergence of the Theory of Jewish Concept Derivation
In more recent years, especially under the impact of the
research just reviewed, a number of scholars continue to question
whether there is a significant relationship between the sl ta ^
-convention and the apostle-concept. However, there has been little
effort to specify further the circum-stances of early Christian
life that produced it. The theory of gnostic origins proposed by
Schmithals has found no support, but during this same period a
number of new studies have undertaken to defend the relationship of
the Christian apostle-concept to the sending-convention realized in
the slah-concept. With some variation, their tendency is to
concentrate less on the
65 Office, 115.
66 Office, 147-48; examples cited are often from Christian
literature.
67 Office, 191-92.
68 In the final part of his study (Office, 231-88) he shows how
Christian use of this gnostic
concept, developing first in the Pauline communities and
especially under the influence of Paul, was then transferred to the
twelve and eventually limited to Paul and the twelve.
69 Office, 229-30.
70 Factors that led to the choice of the word apostlos by the NT
writers are not much
discussed. L. Cerfaux notes the natural derivation from the
verbal cognate with its important place in the NT and claims that
it was preferred to angelos, the more ordinary designation for a
messenger, because that word already had a specific meaning
(Christian, 120). Schmithals claims gnostic influence.
-
Agnew: The NT Apostle-Concept 91
specific significance of the slah-Rgure of rabbinic times for
their argu-ment. Rather, they tend to see both apostle and slah as
developments of the same OT-Jewish sending-convention observable
far back into OT times. They take their point of departure from the
authentic Pauline letters. These positions allow them to deal with
the objections raised against the earlier presentation of the
theory, namely, that the slah-Rgure is at most a juridical
phenomenon witnessed only in materials later than the NT, and that
the theory operates primarily on a later view of apostleship found
in the NT narrative literature. These positions are anticipated in
the work of H. von Campenhausen, who notes the need to start from
the Pauline writings.71 B. Gerhardsson is particularly eager to
show the use of the OT sending-convention at stake in connection
with religious phenomena of profound significance.72 J. Roloff
presents an early summary of this posi-tion.73 G. Schule, in
criticism of Klein and Schmithals, offers a very care-fully
developed defense of this position, in some ways more in touch with
the earlier phases of its development.74 Most interesting and
substantial is the contribution of F. Hahn developed with broad
insight and careful attention to detail.75
Work on the subject is reviewed in the order of the previous
paragraph. The viewpoints expressed by Hahn will be used to provide
a framework for presentation of later thought on the
slah-theory.
The impact of criticism directed against connection of the
apostle-concept and the slah-convention is clear. The work of Klein
and Schmithals has been particularly significant in this respect,
though, of course, not all who take this position do so under their
influence.7e These
71 "Apostelbegriff" esp. 104-15.
72 "Die Boten Gottes und die Apostel Christi," SE 27 (1962)
89-131, the first part of which
is a review and critique of the work of Klein and Schmithals
mentioned above. 73
Apostolat, esp. 9-15, 38-41, 272-74 et passim. This is the
latest major monograph on the subject of apostleship.
74 Die urchristliche Kollegialmission (ATANT 48; Zurich:
Zwingli, 1967) 7-18.
75 "Apostolat"; see esp. 69: "Wir kommen bei der Frage nach den
Voraussetzungen zu dem
Ergebnis, dass es im Urchristentum einerseits eine in
Abhngigkeit von jdischer Rechtspraxis durchgefhrte Sendung der
Gemeinden gab. Andererseits gab es eine Sendung, die mit einer
Christophanie in Zusammenhang stand und als stndige Beauftragung
durch den Aufer-standenen in Entsprechung zur Sendung der
alttestamentlichen Propheten verstanden wurde. Beides geht auf
dieselbe Wurzel zurck, nmlich auf den Grundsatz von der im Auf-trag
begrndeten Vollmacht und der stellvertretenden Wahrnehmung der
bertragenen Aufgabe, ist aber aus sehr verschiedenen Bereichen der
jdischen berlieferung vom ltesten Christentum aufgenommen
worden."
76 It is represented in more recent dictionary articles; see D.
Mller, "Apostle," Dictionary
of New Testament Theology (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1975) 1.
134: "The present writer considers that the investigations of
Schmithals and Klein make it impossible to take the institution of
ie Slah as the basis of apostleship in the Church"; and 128-35
generally (but with qualification, on which see n. 93 below); G.
Klein, BHH 1. 111. It is also supported in monograph and essay
literature; see W. Kramer, Christ, Lord, Son of God (SBT 50;
-
92 Journal of Biblical Literature
writers largely repeat the arguments outlined above77 Beyond its
impact as indicated above, the theory of Schmithals has
been almost universally rejected. Reviewers have generally
presented it as fantastic.78 Criticism on methodological grounds is
devastating. Schmith-als's composite of the "gnostic apostle" is
derived from a welter of often conflicting gnostic materials
spanning the whole history of gnosticism, all characterized by the
common trait of postdating the phenomenon of which they are
purported to explain the origin. Use of the NT itself in the
develop-ment of the theory begs the question. Further, Schmithals's
claim to have established the close phenomenological likeness of
Christian and gnostic apostles is at best exaggerated. Likenesses,
when they can at all be claimed, are most often formal in
character. Moreover, his claim to have shown linguistic dependence
of the NT on gnosticism in this respect rests almost entirely on
the very problematical use of the NT evidence.79 Schmithals's
theory is an obvious casualty of the general withdrawal of
contemporary scholarship from the position of those who make
exaggerated claims for the significance of gnostic influence on the
NT.
Since the eclipse of the Bultmann school with its frequent
atomizing, hypercritical, and tendentious exegesis, the more
balanced critical approach that has emerged, stimulated and
sharpened by its dialogue with the Bult-mannians, began to make
itself felt in this area of discussion. The scholars who have
revived the theory that apostleship is connected with the
sending-convention of OT and rabbinic Judaism manifest in the
slah-Rgure do not, in fact, add a great deal to the developments
summarized by Rengstorf. But they put the various relevant
materials together in a more coherent and
Naperville, IL: Allenson, 1966) 55-63; J. Giblet, "The Twelve in
History and Theology," The Birth of the Church (ed. J. Giblet; New
York: Alba House, 1968) 66-68; W. Schneemelcher, "Apostle and
Apostolic," New Testament Apocrypha (ed. E. Hennecke and W.
Schnee-melcher; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1975) 2. 27; D. Lhrmann,
Das Offenbarungsverstndnis bei Paulus und in paulinischen Gemeinden
(WMANT 16; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1965) 93 n. 1; S.
Freyne, The Twelve Apostles and Disciples (London: Sheed &
Ward, 1968) 50-51; Lemaire, "Ministries," 141-43; Kirk,
"Apostleship," 250-52, who does not cite any of the writers named
in nn. 72-75 above.
77 Most recently, K. Waif, "Das jdische Schaliach-Institut,
Rechtsinstitut und Vorbild das
Apostelamtes?" Christianismo nella Storia 1 (1980) 391-99,
available only in abstract, IZBG 28 (1981/82) 217.
78 See, e.g., Schweizer, TLZ 78 (1962) 837-40; Gerhardsson,
"Boten," 95-105; L.-M.
Dewailly, RB 71 (1964) 468-70; E. Gttgemanns, "Literatur,"
64-69. This is also true of later studies, including those that
show sympathy for Schmithals's criticism of the sZi/i-theory; see
D. Georgi, Die Gegner des Paulus im 2 Korintherbrief (WMANT 11;
Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1964) 40-42; Lhrmann,
Offenbarungsverstndnis, 93; Roloff, Aposto-lat, 20; Brockhaus,
Charisma, 117-18, etc.
79 A noncommittal but generally friendly reviewer, G. Haufe
(ZRGG 14 [1962] 286) calls
this the thinnest element in his theory.
-
Agnew: The NT Apostle-Concept 93
methodologically appropriate way. Some account of this newly
expressed position must be given here.80
Responding to the criticism, in significant ways quite
legitimate, that older study of the question started with the later
and historically problem-atical NT narrative literaturewhereas the
earliest available information is from Paulalmost all these
scholars look first to the Pauline witness.81 Starting from the
generally accepted position that the use of the word apostle is
earlier than Paul, they attempt to survey the different levels of
his usage.82 They show that Paul clearly knows a broader and less
technical use of the term alongside his solemn technical usage.
Although there is some difference in assessment of the evidence for
this more general use, there is agreement that the community
apostles of 2 Cor 8:23 and Phil 2:5 are examples that others are
called apostles in a less than solemn sense.83 However the details
are to be settled, they insist upon the interrelationship of these
different uses of the word. And it is precisely the OT-Jewish
sending-convention expressed in the root slh that binds together
the different stages
80 It appears in later dictionary articles; see Roloff,
"Apostel/Apostolat/Apostolizitt I.
Neues Testament," Theologische Realenzyklopdie (ed. G. Krause
and G. Mller; Berlin: de Gruyter, 1978) 3. 432-33. It is also found
in more recent monograph and essay literature; see P.-A. Harle, "La
notion biblique d'apostolicit," ETR 40 (1965) 135-37; G. Gaide, Des
aptres aux pasteurs (Evangile 64; Paris: Ligue catholique de
l'vangile, 1966) 11-12; Brown, "Twelve and Apostolate," 798: "The
Jewish concept shaluah (shaliah) still seems the most plausible
background for the New Testament apostolate, even though the latter
has aspects not found in the former"; H. Kasting, Die Anfnge der
urchristlichen Mission (BEvT 55; Munich: Kaiser, 1969) 71-75, a
well-stated summary; Brockhaus, Charisma, 117-19, apparently; T.
Weiser, "Notes on the Meaning of the Apostolate," International
Review of the Missions 64 (1975) 129-30; R. D. Culver, "Apostles
and Apostolate in the New Testament," BSac 134 (1977) 132-33.
81 See Gerhardsson, "Boten," evident in the way the essay is
developed; Roloff, Apostolat,
38; Schule, Kollegialmission, 7-18; Hahn, "Apostolat," 56: "Bei
der Frage nach dem Apostolat der vorpaulinischen und paulinischen
Zeit sind die Aussagen ber die ddeka beiseite-lassen. . . . Zur
Beantwortung stellen wir die Evangelien zunchst ganz zurck und
be-schrnken uns auf die Paulusbriefe. . . ."
82 Schule, Kollegialmission, 13-18; Hahn, "Apostolat,"
56-61.
83 Schule, Kollegialmission, 13; Hahn, "Apostolat," 56. Schule
refers also to "missionary
apostles," examples of which he sees in 1 Cor 15:7, Gal 1:17,
19, and would consider the usage "false apostles," e.g., 2 Cor
11:13, as deriving from this general category (p. 13). He ascribes
the development of the solemn usage to Paul (p. 14). Hahn
distinguishes further a group of wandering "charismatic apostles,"
e.g., 1 Cor 12:29, with which he would connect the "false apostles"
of 2 Corinthians and the apostles of Eph 4:11, Rev 2:2, and Did. 11
(pp. 58-61). He ascribes the solemn use of the term to the
pre-Pauline stage of concept development and would include as
examples of this usage such texts as 1 Cor 15:7; Gal 1:17, 19 (pp.
56-58). His position seems preferable, though one may question
aspects of it. Would Paul have main-tained the noncharismatic
character of his apostleship? Most scholars would regard 1 Cor
12:29 and Eph 4:11 as examples of full technical usage. These
questions lie beyond the more immediate interests of this
paper.
-
94 Journal of Biblical Literature
of Pauline usage.84 All from the community apostles to the
apostle of Jesus Christ are commissioned agents sent to act in the
name of others/another.85
Particular attention is given by these scholars to the criticism
raised against conceptual derivation from the slah-Rgures of
rabbinic times as postdating the development of NT apostleship and
to the absence of the nominal form slah in literature previous to
or contemporary with the NT. These facts are scarcely to be
questioned.86 But they take issue with the willingness to dismiss
the theory of relationship between apostleship and the slh
sending-convention in all its forms because of the absence of the
form slah in the extant documentation. The connection of apostle
and slah lies not, or not necessarily, in the immediate derivation
of the former from the latter, as often suggested by older
proponents of the theory, but in their common relationship to the
sending-convention expressed in the slh/apostellein word group. In
the more recent period of research Ger-hardsson is the first to
stress this point, which lies behind the title of his essay "Die
Boten Gottes und die Apostel Christi," and it is generally
supported by these scholars.87
Along lines suggested in the last paragraph these writers
attempt to show that, although the rabbinic slah-Rgure is the
delegate of a human sender with largely juridical significance, the
sending-convention that lies behind it has in fact been used to
describe figures of profound religious and theological
significance. Granting the ultimate newness of the NT
apostle-concept, and so the valid observation of those who in this
respect maintain
84 Schule (Kollegialmission, 12-14) claims derivation of the
technical and solemn usage
from the less technical with criticism of Schmithals, who,
recognizing a nontechnical usage in the NT, denies any connection
between it and the more specifically Christian use of the term.
Schule writes: "So erscheint der technische Gebrauch des
Apostelbegriffs bei Paulus als eine Vertiefung des allgemeineren.
Das ist historisch zehr wichtig" (p. 14). This position appears to
lie behind the thought of other scholars in this group, but it is
not an inevitability for them.
85 Hahn, who also discusses synoptic usage in this connection
("Apostolat," 64), writes:
"Die herangezogenen neutestamentlichen Belege verweisen in ihrer
Gesamtheit auf eine jdischen Rechtsgrundsatz, die sich durch
mehrere Jahrhunderte hindurch verfolgen lsst" (p. 65); and see
references in the following notes.
86 The nominal form apparently does not appear in the Qumran
materials.
87 "Boten," 109-10: "Aber die Kategorie Apostel Christi'muss mit
der jdischen Kategorie
der Boten Gottes zusammengestellt werden. Die Ursache, dass man
dies nicht allgemein eingesehen hat, liegt darin, dass man im
jdischen Material bisher allzu einseitig nach dem Terminus
Schaliach Gottes gesucht hat, anstaat phnomenologisch vorzugehen
und die Sache selbst zu untersuchen . . ."; he sees the categories
"Boten der Menschen" (e.g., the "commu-nity apostles") and "Boten
Gottes" as closely related (pp. 108-9). See also Roloff, Apostolat,
272-73; Hahn, "Apostolat," 65-66. Schule is less interested in this
point and appears to argue from the conjectured presence of the
rabbinical sending-convention in the NT period, more in the style
of the older research. For him, this concept, which was known in
the Pauline congregations as indicated by the references to
"community apostles," was then employed by a process of
"inner-community development" for "missionary apostles" and by Paul
for "the apostle of Jesus Christ" (see Kollegialmission,
15-18).
-
Agnew: The NT Apostle-Concept 95
its Christian origin, the point is surely not without relevance.
It allows an answer to the criticism directed against this theory
on the grounds that the s/iah-convention is basically legal,
whereas apostleship is basically reli-gious. The use of the general
sending-convention in the OT provides a variety of important
analogues to apostleship as a religious phenomenon. In this, these
scholars are in touch with the older phase of research, but they
illustrate their point by reference to a broader and richer
assemblage of OT references. Gerhardsson calls attention to the
frequency with which slh/ apostellein is construed with
maVk/angelos and especially with nhi /pro-phtes, and in other
significant ways.88 In this respect, the importance of prophetic
vocation is paramount.89 Hahn calls special attention to the fact
that NT use of apostellein/pempein frequently echoes OT usage of
slh with reference to prophetic sending. In what is among the most
innovative sections of his essay, he calls attention to the
particular importance of Isa 61:1 in this regard.90 This usage is
first christological,91 but the NT connec-tion of all sending with
the sending of Jesus makes it important for consideration of
apostleship as well. This is especially so in view of the
well-known fact that Paul describes himself in his vocation as
apostle in terms derived from OT description of prophetic
vocation.92 OT usage, especially represented in the descriptions of
prophetic call, involves employment of the word group
slh/apostellein, which is continued in the NT. It provides
reference to OT and NT figures (including Christ himself) who
represent highly significant phenomenological parallels to NT
apostleship.93
88 "Boten," 110-13.
89 See Hahn, "Apostolat," 66-67.
90 Ibid., 69-75.
91 The usage of the Fourth Gospel in this respect has given rise
to several interesting studies;
among which see J. Radermakers, "Mission et apostolat dans
l'vangile johannique," SE II (=TU 87 [1964]) 100-121; J. Khl, Die
Sendung Jesu und die Kirche nach dem Johannes-Evangelium (Studia
Instituti Missiologici Societatis Verbi Divini 11; St. Augustin:
Stegler, 1967), with extensive citation of literature.
92 See Hahn, "Apostolat," 68. A number of scholars who take no
position on the question
discussed in this paper have written significantly on the
prophetic background of Paul's description of his own vocation;
among whom see A. M. Denis, "Laptre Paul, prophet 'mes-sianique'
des gentils," ETL 33 (1957) 245-318; idem, "Election et la vocation
de Paul, faveur cleste," RevThom 57 (1957) 405-28; idem,
"L'investitur de la fonction apostolique par 'apoca-lypse,'" RB 64
(1957) 335-62, 492-515; J. Cambier, "Paul, aptre du Christ et
prdicateur de l'vangile" MRT 91 (1959) 1015-16; T. Holtz, "Zum
Selbstverstndnis des Apostels Paulus," TLZ 91 (1966) 94-126. This
has been a recurrent interest of scholars representing various
points of view on the religionsgeschichtlich question; see nn. 30
and 59 above.
93 The value of this position is now recognized by scholars who
continue to deny a connec-
tion of aposde and Slah; see D. Mller, "Apostle," 134-35 and n.
7 above; E. Ksemann, Commentary on Romans (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
1980) 5-6: "It seems fairly certain that the Semitic idea of
sending with an authoritative commission determined the NT
under-standing of apostle. . . . The influence of the Jewish
institution li(a)h . . . may be present when the NT refers to the
sending out of the apostles two by two. Elsewhere however it is to
be rejected . . ."; this because of the absence of significant
phenomenological parallels.
-
96 Journal of Biblical Literature
With the development of these points, the writers whose opinion
is surveyed here rest their case for the position that, after all,
what is basic to the older research of the slah-theory does provide
the background for the derivation of the NT apostle-concept. They
give ample response to the criticism raised against the older
research by beginning with the Pauline witness, by loosening
dependence upon the rabbinic slah-Rgure with a conjectured use of
the nominal form slah in the period contemporaneous with the NT,
and by showing the existence of the slh/apostellein
sending-convention in the OT and the NT with reference to figures
of profound religious and theological significance.
It is difficult to speak of consensus on anything in biblical
studies, but if the position taken in the more important recent
research done on this question may be considered indicative, it can
at least be said that there is a growing consensus on the
connection of apostleship with the OT sending-convention expressed
by use of the word group slh-apostellein.
SCHOL/RS PRESS Vision and Discernment: An Orientation in
Theological Study Charles M. Wood Advances a broad and integrated
orientation to theological education and practice After briefly
sketching the history and incoherent situation of contemporary
theological education, the author develops an understanding of
Christian inquiry that utilizes the twin judgments of "vision" and
"discernment" A work certain to be useful to both beginning
theology students and the mature scholar alike "Clearly written and
forcefully argued "Schubert Ogden Code: 00 08 02 Paper $12.95
(8.95)
Unfinished Man and the Imagination: Toward an Ontology and a
Rhetoric of Revelation Ray Hart Issued again nearly twenty years
after its initial appearance, this volume stands as a landmark in
fundamental theology Defining a course between neoorthodoxy and
liberalism, Hart utilizes the insights of philosophers, poets, and
literary writers alike in articulating an imaginative union of
aesthetic sensitivity and theological analysis Mark C Taylor's
introductory essay, written specifically for this edition,
describes the continuing relevance of Hart's concerns Code: 00 07
15 $12.95 (10.95)
*( ) denotes price available to members of sponsoring societies
and subscribers to Scholars Press jour nais Write for information
Prepayment (check M/C or Visa) required GA residents add 4% sales
tax Postage/handling first item $1 00 $ 50 for each thereafter $4
00 maximum Outside US $2 00 surcharge
_ Scholars Press Customer Services P.O. Box 4869, Hampden
Station, Baltimore, MD 21211
-
^ s
Copyright and Use:
As an ATLAS user, you may print, download, or send articles for
individual use according to fair use as defined by U.S. and
international copyright law and as otherwise authorized under your
respective ATLAS subscriber agreement.
No content may be copied or emailed to multiple sites or
publicly posted without the copyright holder(s)' express written
permission. Any use, decompiling, reproduction, or distribution of
this journal in excess of fair use provisions may be a violation of
copyright law.
This journal is made available to you through the ATLAS
collection with permission from the copyright holder(s). The
copyright holder for an entire issue of a journal typically is the
journal owner, who also may own the copyright in each article.
However, for certain articles, the author of the article may
maintain the copyright in the article. Please contact the copyright
holder(s) to request permission to use an article or specific work
for any use not covered by the fair use provisions of the copyright
laws or covered by your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. For
information regarding the copyright holder(s), please refer to the
copyright information in the journal, if available, or contact ATLA
to request contact information for the copyright holder(s).
About ATLAS:
The ATLA Serials (ATLAS) collection contains electronic versions
of previously published religion and theology journals reproduced
with permission. The ATLAS collection is owned and managed by the
American Theological Library Association (ATLA) and received
initial funding from Lilly Endowment Inc.
The design and final form of this electronic document is the
property of the American Theological Library Association.