Foreword
This article is an adaptation of a paper written earlier this year as part of my current postgraduate studies at St. Hild college. I’ve added it here as something of a resource for any who might find it of interest, recognising that it is written in an academic style. It also raises, without answering, some interesting questions of how the apostolic developed from the Hebraic roots of the Twelve, particularly with respect to the ministry of Paul and the apostolic ministry to the nations.
[NOTE: Apologies, currently the internal links for footnotes are broken in substack, I will seek to fix this and update]
Introduction
The apostolic[1] is a common concept in popular discourse about Christian vocation.[2] The broad aim of this paper is to make a theological contribution that integrates the Hebrew Scriptures.
I conclude that conception of the apostolic must begin with the Twelve ‘apostles.’[3] They are inseparable from the vocation and eschatological hope of their Jewish roots. This paper will explore this foundation; subsequent conclusions are for further work.
There are two parts. In the first I will examine different scholarly approaches to the apostolic and draw my conclusion from biblical and related sources. In the second part I will demonstrate how this conception integrates with covenant history. I will consider the dynamic constitution of tribal leadership in the pre-monarchy era, specifically in Numbers 1. I will also demonstrate a correlation between apostolic mission and exilic prophecy, specifically in Jeremiah 3.
Part 1: Conceiving the Apostolic
It is indisputable that the early church was marked by the ministry of ‘apostles’ who were sent – ἀποστέλλω – by Christ and fundamentally marked the church.[4] In the last century, this phenomenon has been examined. In my nomenclature, we can note the traditionalist approach, the gnostic approach, and the shaliach approach.
The traditionalist approach emphasises the novelty of apostolic ministry; Christ institutes a new thing proven in the Christian episcopacy that follows.[5] This approach recognises Jewish roots;[6] Christ’s mission is covenantal fulfilment pertaining to sacramental[7] and episcopal authority.[8] Dix sees an apostolic ‘prototype in the Jewish shaliach’[9] – an office that we will examine below – but emphasises how it reflects the subsequent ecclesiastical development.[10] This is therefore a replacement theology.[11] It has the weight of contribution from across church history but it is anachronistic, approaching from outcome rather than origin.[12] I will not depend on this approach.
The gnostic approach considers the Pauline expression of the apostolic to be definitive, and original. Schmithals is the exemplary scholar. For him, Antioch is the ‘actual missionary center of primitive Christianity’[13] and the apostolic concept pre-exists Christianity in that location.[14] The Christian characteristic is the witness of divine mystery in the risen Christ, distinct from the broader sense of missionary work.[15] Paul is the epitomic apostle and probably the ultimate;[16] his apostleship is not derivative.[17] Rather than Christian or rabbinical origins, Schmithals finds a protype in the gnostic ‘cynic sage’[18] or ‘redeemer-apostle.’[19]
This approach helpfully takes Paul seriously, especially when he defends his apostleship against ‘superapostles’ with gnostic traits.[20] However, the pre-Antioch manifestation of the apostolic cannot be easily dismissed as a ‘backward projection from a later period.’[21] His exegesis depends on late development redaction[22] and fails to negotiate how the Twelve, and the Jerusalem Church, did actually exist and that Antioch derived from them in some factual sense.[23] This approach diminishes the rich witness of the gospels and their Jewish roots. It would be a useful foil for further work examining the development of the apostolic after the Twelve, but less helpful for exploring foundations.
Thirdly, for the shaliach approach we turn to Rengstorf,[24] who although early twentieth century and preceding the discoveries at Qumran is widely referenced. Rengstorf sees the origins of the apostolate in rabbinical Jewish constructs.[25] Acknowledging the classical Greek possibilities,[26] he concludes that ‘Rabbinical Judaism carries us much further […] the term shaliᵃḥ has its recognised place […] the nearest parallel to […] ἀπόστολος.’[27] That term, שָׁלִיחַ, is at the heart of this conception, encapsulating ‘the one whom a man sends is the equivalent of himself.’[28] It connotes a legal commissioning ‘similar to a power of attorney.’[29]
The correlation of apostle with שָׁלִיחַ is useful, but the terms are not coextensive.[30] שָׁלִיחַ is not in the Hebrew scriptures in any usefully related sense. It does not connote missionary work.[31] Rengstorf accepts this but as a point of differentiation, not invalidation.[32] His emphasis is not on function, but on how one is ‘commissioned and authorised by God.’[33] In this sense, Jesus himself is God’s שָׁלִיחַ.[34] By delegation[35] this is applied to ‘the circle of the Twelve’ as well as to ‘the first Christian missionaries.’[36]
The purest application of שָׁלִיחַ is for a tightly specified commission[37] such as the tasks Jesus gives his disciples in Galilee. This is conceivably expanded by the Great Commission[38] for the the apostolic era.[39]
The applicability of this approach is limited to status rather than origination. We must note Rengstorf’s reliance on post-Christian rabbinical sources; one might ask if שָׁלִיחַ informs απόστολος, or vice versa.[40]
The Twelve as an Apostolic Foundation
My approach begins with the premise that the apostolic cannot be conceived without reference to the Twelve. Thus:
We can affirm the apostleship of the Twelve as commissioned by Christ. It is a matter of fact that Jesus set apart a group from the larger cohort of his followers. We note how, in Matthew 10.1-16, Jesus ‘summoned his twelve disciples.’[41] With some consideration,[42] we know who they are (10.2-4).[43] They are given authority[44] over spirits and disease (10.1). They are ‘sent out’ – ἀπέστειλεν[45] (10.5) – and so they are called, explicitly, ἀπόστολοι (10.2).[46] This specific and bounded task here affirms the shaliach approach. The apostles are representatives: ‘He who receives you receives me and he who receives me receives him who sent me.’[47] Jesus is specific, giving detailed instructions (10.5-15) and offering educative warnings (10.16-42).
If this Galilean ministry had remained the sole focus that would be the extent of it; ‘apostles’ would simply mean that ‘those who had been sent, returned.’[48] However, the Twelve as an identifiable group persists. References to them are a steady backdrop to Jesus’ ministry even though the term ‘apostle’ is infrequent.[49] Moreover, other accounts depict a more general appointment. Luke notes he ‘chose twelve of them, whom he also named apostles’[50] and Mark describes a general intention that they simply ‘be with him.’[51]
We can affirm the apostleship of the Twelve in their eschatological significance. The appointment of the Twelve is kerygmatic[52] towards tribal and covenant-nation restoration. Giles notes the obvious correlation: ‘The selection of this limited group, twelve in number […] were to be seen as the nucleus of a restored Israel gathered around the Messiah.’[53] Geyser takes it further, noting Jesus’ Galilean ministry ‘in the territory of Zebulun and Naphtali’[54] is a fulfilment of Assyrian-era Isaiah 9.1-2 and so ‘the restoration of the twelve tribes will therefore start in the land of the first deportees.’[55] This emphasis, even considering the language of ‘Galilee of the Gentiles’ is compelling;[56] the Twelve represent a restored Israel.
Jesus’ eschatological intent is explicit: ‘Truly I tell you, at the renewal of all things, when the Son of Man is seated on the throne of his glory, you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.’[57] If a שָׁלִיחַ relationship was created by the Galilean mission, here in Matthew 19 it is extended into the eschaton. Marshall notes this is no less than Jesus promising ‘a share in this rule to his disciples.’[58] Meier concurs, ‘Jesus promised […] that his inner circle of the Twelve, the prophetic sign and beginning of the regathering of the twelve tribes, would share in the governance […] of the reconstituted Israel.[59] This is reinforced by Matthias’ appointment as Judas’ replacement. He is suitably qualified[60] to judge in Christ’s name. So traditionalist Dix states: ‘Matthias is added to restore the college of Twelve Princes of the New Israel,’[61] and Giles amplifies: ‘Luke believed that the Spirit could not be given until the number twelve was restored.’[62]
This is echoed in Revelation where the central throne is surrounded by ‘twenty-four thrones, and seated on the thrones are twenty-four elders.’[63] While there is a variety of views,[64] the traditional allusion to the twelve tribes and the twelve apostles[65] is compelling. Jesus’ intention is there, where Baumgarten sees a ‘judicial function’ for the elders.[66] Similarly, with the coming of the New Jerusalem:
It has a great, high wall with twelve gates, […] and on the gates are inscribed the names of the twelve tribes of the Israelites […] And the wall of the city has twelve foundations, and on them are the twelve names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.[67]
This is the climactic symbol of restored Israel.[68] The tribal gates reflect Ezekiel 48.30-31[69] alongside the foundations named for the Twelve who are explicitly called ‘apostles.’ Some want to deflect this nomenclature, ‘which cannot simply designate the individuals concerned […] they stand instead for the apostolic message of Jesus’[70] but this is unnecessary. The Twelve are foundational to the new Jerusalem.
We can affirm that the apostleship of the Twelve is recognisable in the Jewish context. The evidence here is from Qumran. While we must not conflate the Qumran and Christian communities, they provide an important context,[71] arguably more so than the rabbinic or gnostic frames.
In the Qumran corpus, we find twelvefold leadership structures for priestly,[72] and military leadership within everyday[73] and eschatological frames. This is linked to tribal identity.[74] Within the ‘rule of the congregation of Israel in the final days,’[75] ‘the assembly of famous men’ includes ‘[the Me]ssiah of Israel’ and ‘before him shall sit the chiefs [of the clans of Israel, each] one according to his dignity.’[76]
A key text is the Isaiah Pesher, a commentary on Isaiah 54:11-12 where Isaiah imagines a renewed Jerusalem built with gems. The Pesher’s interpretation ‘concerns the twelve [chiefs of the priests who] illuminate with the judgement of the Urim and the Thummin] […] Its interpretation concerns the chiefs of the tribes of Israel in the las[t d]ays.’[77] Noted commentator, Flusser, allows that ‘Jesus accepted the originally Essene view that the “twelve”’ will do exactly this, ‘when they sit in judgment as the “chiefs of the tribes of Israel.”’[78]
More generally, Baumgarten agrees that ‘the writers of the NT utilized the Qumran notions […] to portray Jesus and his disciples as sitting in judgment over the twelve tribes and the nations of the world.’[79] Likewise, Geyser sees that Jesus ‘borrowed from John […] the notion of a twelve tribe kingdom to be implemented soon, and to be prepared for by a numerically equal and representative organisation of twelves.’[80] I am content, with Flusser, to see ‘striking parallels […] with regard to the religious and conceptual underpinnings of the twelve apostles, the inner circle of Jesus.’[81]
An Initial Conclusion
Jesus’ appointment of the Twelve invests the apostolic with essential meaning. The Twelve are commissioned in both particular and general senses. Their status is explicitly connected to tribal symbolism and eschatological hope recognisable within the broader religious discourse of the period. In what follows, my aim is to demonstrate that this conception is demonstrable from and deepened by Hebrew scripture.
Part Two: Apostolic Foundations in the Hebrew Scriptures
Section One: The apostolic in the tribal constitution of Israel and the נְשִׂיאִים
The theme of the Twelve Tribes and their leaders begins in Genesis 46:8ff where ‘the sons of Israel, their father Jacob, their little ones, and their wives’[82] are enumerated. Here they are simply בְּנֵֽי־יִשְׂרָאֵ֛ל. In chapter 49, Jacob convenes these sons to receive his prophetic blessing and in verse 28, for the first time, they are called ‘the twelve tribes of Israel.’[83] ‘Tribe’ here is שֵׁ֫בֶט which connotes ‘rod, staff, club, sceptre’[84] indicative of the authority that will emerge.
This twelvefold structure persists into the exodus era. Morales gives us insight into this period: The crisis of Sinai paves the way for the divine arrangement of ‘the covenant community […] structurally expressed as the Camp of Israel’ centred on the ‘Dwelling’ of YHWH.[85] The wilderness itself is an eschatological place, a formative context of divine courtship, the consummation of which is eschatological hope: ‘Until the final end and new beginning, bĕmidbar, “in the wilderness”, will characterize the life of all God’s people in every age.’[86]
The Israelite leadership similarly develops.[87] Before Sinai there are references to the ‘elders of Israel,’זִקְנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֗ל.[88] This somewhat generic term[89] refers to a cohort of at least seventy.[90] Another phrase is the ‘leaders of the congregation,’ נְשִׂיאֵ֣י הָֽעֵדָ֔ה.[91] This could be a technical phrase pertaining to the functions of an assembly but the narrative suggests decision-making and representation at the highest level.[92] Indeed, in Numbers, as the people are more formally constituted, נָשִׂיא clearly means tribal leadership:
1 The Lord spoke to Moses in the wilderness of Sinai, in the tent of meeting, […] saying: 2 Take a census of the whole congregation of Israelites, in their clans, by ancestral houses, according to the number of names, every male individually; 3 from twenty years old and upwards, everyone in Israel able to go to war […] 4 A man from each tribe shall be with you, each man the head of his ancestral house. 5 These are the names of the men who shall assist you:
From Reuben, […] Simeon, […] Judah, […], Issachar, […] Zebulun, […] Ephraim, […] Manasseh, […] Benjamin, […] Dan, […] Asher, […] Gad, […] Naphtali, […]
16 These were the ones chosen from the congregation, the leaders of their ancestral tribes, the heads of the divisions of Israel.[93]
In verse 16 the phrase is נְשִׂיאֵ֖י מַטֹּ֣ות אֲבֹותָ֑ם. The natural rendition of נָשִׂיא as ‘one lifted up’ – i.e. ‘a chief’ or a ’prince’[94] – connotes the weight of the position.[95] מַטֶּה here renders ‘tribe’ with the sense of ‘branch’[96] expressing the patriarchal – אֲבוֹת – origination and applying dendric imagery that can connote covenantal belonging.[97] These ‘chiefs’ are also רָאשֵׁ֛י אַלְפֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל, and so they are ‘heads’[98] of ‘divisions.’ אֶ֫לֶף is strictly a ‘thousand’, but more generally ‘a company.’[99] A hierarchy of leadership[100] is alongside a developing system of governance.[101] The twelve named are thus placed over this wider leadership as ‘called, exalted’ heads.[102]
While the נְשִׂיאִים represent the tribes here, their status is not merely hereditary right. They have been קְריּאֵ֣י הָעֵדָ֔ה, ‘chosen from the congregation.’[103] The vocational language of קָרִיא - ‘called, summoned’[104] - should not be softened. These men are ‘designated’ – נִקְּב֖וּ in verse 17 - and, despite those who assume some kind of election,[105] the passage is divine speech in the tent of meeting. The Lord is the agent; he has appointed them.
These chiefs – as an original cohort and in subsequent generations[106] – function as a council; they receive the Lord’s commands[107] and mediate disputes.[108] However, their function is not merely pragmatic. They are present at key covenantal moments. They hear the covenant-making voice of the Lord at Sinai.[109] It is the נְשִׂיאִים who bring the gems of the high-priestly breastplate.[110] They present the offering of each tribe at the consecration of the tabernacle.[111] This is far from incidental. The census itself, their specific task in Numbers 1, is covenantal: ‘The Israelites are being counted in order to be arranged about YHWH’s Dwelling as his people.’[112] Indeed, the imperative for ‘count’ in verse 2 - שְׂאוּ – is literally ‘to lift,’ the same root as נָשִׂיא;[113] they are lifted up in order to lift the people into their purpose.
All this informs our conception of the apostolic; the נְשִׂיאִים and Jesus’ Twelve align: Firstly, their numbers both derive from the בְּנֵֽי־יִשְׂרָאֵ֛ל and pertain to the tribes. Secondly the appointment of both is by divine command. Thirdly, they are both representative witnesses of and participants in covenant. Fourthly, they are both conduits of the Lord’s teaching and leadership. Fifthly, they are both integral to the establishment of a covenant people. Sixthly, they both share in the Lord’s governance in the present and in eschatological expectation.[114]
These are useful correlations. The biblical theology they indicate is more substantial. Morales is a useful expositor of this. For him, the Camp of Israel is the ‘ideal paradigm’[115] of YHWH dwelling with his people.[116] Its imagery is found in the idealized temple-city of Ezekiel and the Qumran Temple Scroll and also Revelation.[117] The tribes and the נְשִׂיאִים are integral to this ‘vertical typology’ whereby ‘the arrangement of the tribes around the Dwelling is rooted within the context of the heaven-earth analogy of the Dwelling itself, Israel’s Camp may be seen to form the earthly counterpart to YHWH’s heavenly entourage.’[118] Indeed, the census itself lifts up כָּל־יֹצֵ֥א צָבָ֖א in Numbers 1.3, establishing the Lord’s host – צָבָ֖א. The imagery of colours, gems, and standards of the four tribal groupings[119] are revelatory. And so, in Ezekiel’s vision of the ‘throne-chariot’[120] these images correlate to the four living creatures whose movement, ‘wherever the spirit would go’[121] matches the cloud-led movement of the camp.[122]
Through this lens we see an integration. The נְשִׂיאִים are used of God to establish a people patterned after divine realities, bound by covenant, and moved by the Spirit. The Twelve also encounter the Spirit of Sinaitic fire at Pentecost, and are commissioned to establish a people, as they are moved by the Spirit. The two are linked by divine reality and cannot be separated;[123] without this integration with the נְשִׂיאִים any conception of the apostolic is adrift.
Section Two: The apostolic in the exilic expectations of restorative shepherds.
Morales’ insight outlined above defines national identity and leadership within a movement connected to eternal reality. Nevertheless, the earthly manifestation evolves; the Camp reaches the promised land, and the twelvefold constitution is overshadowed by messianic royal leadership. The terminology from the earlier age becomes less applicable.
To explore how the exilic period informs the apostolic we begin not with tribal imagery but with pastoral imagery attached to messianic leadership. This imagery is obvious in the ‘good shepherd’ speech of John 10 and in John 21.15-17 Jesus applies it to Peter. In 1 Peter 5.1-4 Peter then applies it to leadership, similarly to how Paul applies it to episcopacy in Acts 20.28. In this way the apostles are also shepherds.
In the Hebrew Scriptures the shepherd image is also often attached to significant leaders, such as Moses[124] or successive messianic kings such as the רֹועֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל rebuked in Ezekiel 34.[125] The Essenes later apply it to the oversight role of ‘Inspector.’[126] However, the image is not coterminous with singular leadership, particularly after the fall of the monarchy.[127] In the intertestamental period it attaches to a diversity of offices.[128] In Jeremiah, ‘the image includes both religious and political figures of varying rank and authority,’ it is a ‘regular portrait of the ruling nobility.’[129] As Jeremiah prophesies about the divine mission of restoration, we find the shepherd image integrated:
15 And I will give you shepherds after my own heart, who will feed you with knowledge and understanding. 16 And when you have multiplied and been fruitful in the land, in those days, declares the LORD, they shall no more say, “The ark of the covenant of the LORD.” It shall not come to mind or be remembered or missed […] 17 At that time Jerusalem shall be called the throne of the LORD, and all nations shall gather to it […] 18 In those days the house of Judah shall join the house of Israel, and together they shall come from the land of the north to the land that I gave your fathers for a heritage.[130]
I will consider this passage alongside the defining expression of apostolic mission, the Great Commission of Matthew 20.18-20.
Firstly, we note the character of the shepherds of verse 15. They are ‘according to my heart’ – כְּלִבִּ֑י. This is a messianic motif, echoing 1 Samuel 13.14, and clearly applicable to Jesus.[131] He, himself, in his prayer of John 17, applies its essence to the apostles not as mere delegation but profound ‘unity of heart and mind and will.’[132] For Jeremiah, these shepherds will ‘feed you’ - וְרָע֥וּ אֶתְכֶ֖ם. The sense of רָעָה, ‘feed’, is strong; it is the act of shepherding, or tending.[133] It matches Jesus’ restorative commission to Peter to ‘feed my lambs.’[134] With the sense that it imparts ‘knowledge and understanding’ – by implication, the content of Jesus’ ‘everything I have commanded you’[135] – it aligns with the Great Commission’s imperative to ‘disciple’ – μαθητεύσατε – which connotes more than learning, rather a disciple ‘lived, ate, travelled, worked, and “sat at the feet” of their Rabbi.’[136]
Secondly we note superlative imagery[137] of restoration in verse 16. There are two aspects. First is the description ‘multiplied and been fruitful’ – תִרְבּוּ וּפְרִיתֶ֨ם – which is covenant language applied to the people, the land, and creation in the Adamic,[138] Noahic,[139] patriarchal,[140] and Mosaic[141] contexts. Beale’s biblical theology demonstrates a connection to apostolic mission: Adam’s fruitfulness coheres to his commission to serve ‘in the Edenic temple […] expanding its boundaries,’ which coheres to the establishment of Israel as a Dwelling of God for all the nations, foreshadowing ‘the much greater event of Jesus’ “Great Commission” to build a greater temple.’[142] In other words, the flourishing of creation and the expanding witness of the apostles are inseparable. The new creation imagery of Revelation 21 is the telos of mission, such that, with Wright, we can affirm that ‘the Great Commission is nothing less than a universalized covenant proclamation’[143] and it incorporates Jeremiah’s hope.
The other image is the fading memory of the ark of the covenant. This is more than a simple waning awareness of a lost object.[144] Thompson considers it a time in which the ‘spiritual realities’ of the ark are embraced.[145] That spiritual reality is the presence of God in a very real sense.[146] The fulfilment in traditional Christology is obvious; Christ is the presence of God. A specific apostolic alignment is in the Great Commission’s assurance: ‘And remember, I am with you always, to the end of the age.’[147]
Thirdly, is the inclusion of the nations in verse 17. It reports a vision of Jerusalem as a throne room; this is reprised in Revelation 21 where it rests on apostolic foundations, and ‘the kings of the earth will bring their glory into it.’[148] This, again, is covenantal fulfilment; the nations are also a beneficiary of blessing through the Abrahamic covenant.[149] The gathering of the nations is thus integral to national and messianic expectation across the prophetic eras.[150] The alignment with the Great Commission is clear; it is towards πάντα τὰ ἔθνη.[151]
However, we must acknowledge that the Great Commission has an outward dynamic.[152] This does not nullify the ingathering motif; by going to the nations, they will be included in the new community. This is the force of James’ use of Amos 9.11-12 at the Council of Jerusalem.[153] These are the centripetal and centrifugal dynamics of mission, to use Wright’s terminology,[154] and they are not at odds. If we conceive of the apostolic mission in which the nations are ‘registered in God’s city, blessed with God’s salvation, accepted in God’s house, called by God’s name [and,] joined with God’s people,’[155] we have an alignment with Jeremiah.
Fourthly, is the restoration of the tribes in verse 18. Jeremiah sees the ‘reunion of Northern Israel and Judah.’[156] It is the restoration of the people to the land promised to ‘your fathers’ and allocated to tribes by the נְשִׂיאִים. We noted earlier how Jesus commenced his ministry in the place of the Assyrian deportation. His kerygma is national restoration, at the deepest level, including the forgiveness of sins.[157] Indeed, the initial shaliach missions are focused on ‘the lost sheep of Israel’[158] and that facet is not diminished in the apostolic age. Geyser suggests that the Great Commission sequence ‘Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria and the edge of the earth’ refers to the locations of the diaspora and implies a restoration motif.[159] Even Gentile-focused Paul would go to the synagogue first[160] and the ‘pillars’ of ‘James and Cephas and John’ focused on going ‘to the circumcised.’[161] Jeremiah’s hope of tribal revival and national reunion is integral to the apostolic mission.
Conclusion
Jeremiah’s prophecy of righteous shepherds thus aligns with the missional dynamics of the apostolic. The divine mission Jeremiah reveals is also in the Commission of the Twelve.[162] We can also return to the נְשִׂיאִים and note the cohesion across all three: God’s people as his host, rightly raised up by ‘raised up ones’ – נְשִׂיאִים - and truly led by his Spirit, is the telos which innervates Jeremiah’s exilic longing for righteous shepherds, which integrates those that Jesus raises up and ‘sends out’ as apostles as a foundation for the eschaton. The chiefs, the shepherds, and the apostles are united in this divine mission.
This is a biblical basis for further work in pastoral theology of the characteristics of contemporary ministry. It is not so much about psychology or leadership styles; it is about faithful alignment with the deepest purposes of God; it is about faithful shepherding such that those who are led find themselves dwelling with the Lord as his host, moving by his Spirit, and so forming his eternal city to which all the world will come.
Bibliography
Ashley, Timothy R., The Book of Numbers, The New International Commentary on the Old Testament (Eerdmans, 1993)
Baumgarten, Joseph M., ‘The Duodecimal Courts of Qumran, Revelation, and the Sanhedrin’, Journal of Biblical Literature, 95.1 (1976), pp. 59–78, doi:10.2307/3265473
Beale, Gregory K., The Temple and the Church’s Mission: A Biblical Theology of the Dwelling Place of God (Apollos, 2006) <https://research.ebsco.com/linkprocessor/plink?id=44dcfcdf-47d8-399d-bd7d-9c23bf911041> [accessed 24 April 2026]
Brown, F., S. Driver, and C. Briggs, The Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon (1906; Seventh printing, Hendrickson, 2003)
Childs, Brevard S., Isaiah, The Old Testament Library (Westminster John Knox Press, 2001)
Clements, Ronald E., Jeremiah: Interpretation: A Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching (Westminster John Knox Press, 2011) <<https://research.ebsco.com/linkprocessor/plink?id=f80db9a5-c6f5-306b-b794-a4e56ce4b092>> [accessed 23 April 2026]
Collins, C. John, ‘שלח’, in New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology & Exegesis, ed. by Willem A. VanGemeren (Zondervan, 1997), iv
Dix, Dom Gregory, ‘The Ministry in the Early Church’, in The Apostolic Ministry: Essays on the History and The Doctrine of Episcopacy, ed. by Kenneth E. Kirk (Hodder & Stoughton, 1946)
Draper, J. A., ‘The Twelve Apostles as Foundation Stones of the Heavenly Jerusalem and the Foundation of the Qumran Community’, Neotestamentica, 22.1 (1988), pp. 41–63
Ehrhardt, Arnold, The Apostolic Succession in the First Two Centuries of the Church (Lutterworth Press, 1953)
Farrer, A. M., ‘The Ministry in the New Testament’, in The Apostolic Ministry: Essays on the History and The Doctrine of Episcopacy, ed. by Kenneth E. Kirk (Hodder & Stoughton, 1946)
Flusser, David, ‘The Isaiah Pesher and the Notion of Twelve Apostles in the Early Church’, in Judaism of the Second Temple Period, Vol 1: Qumran and Apocalypticism, trans. by Azzan Yadin (Eerdmans, 2007)
Geyser, A. S., ‘Jesus, the Twelve and the Twelve Tribes in Matthew’, Neotestamentica, 12 (1978), pp. 1–19
Giles, Kevin, ‘Apostles Before and After Paul’, Churchman, 99.3 (1985), pp. 241–56
Glaser, Mitch, ‘Great Commission and the Coming Kingdom: Matthew 28:18-20’, section 3, Journal of Messianic Jewish Studies., Biola University Archives and Special Collections, 1 (2015) <https://jstor.org/stable/community.39141558> [accessed 24 April 2026]
Green, Michael, The Message of Matthew, The Bible Speaks Today (Inter-Varsity Press, 2000)
Haran, M., ‘The Disappearance of the Ark’, Israel Exploration Journal, 13.1 (1963), pp. 46–58
Kirk, J. Andrew, ‘Apostleship since Rengstorf: Towards a Synthesis’, New Testament Studies, 21.2 (1975), pp. 249–64, doi:10.1017/S0028688500010997
Kirk, Kenneth E., ‘The Apostolic Ministry’, in The Apostolic Ministry: Essays on the History and The Doctrine of Episcopacy, ed. by Kirk, Kenneth E. (Hodder & Stoughton, 1946)
Lemański, Janusz, ‘“No One Will Say Anymore: The Ark of the Covenant of YHWH.” Jeremiah 3:16 and Its Significance for the Tradition of the Ark of the Covenant’, Verbum Vitae, 43.4 (2025), pp. 1209–22, doi:10.31743/vv.19099
Malan, F. S., ‘The Relationship Between Apostolate and Office in the Theology of Paul’, Neotestamentica, 10 (1976), pp. 53–68
Mangina, Joseph L., Revelation, Brazos Theological Commentary on the Bible (Brazos Press, 2010)
Marshall, I. Howard, The Gospel of Luke, The New International Greek Testament Commentary (The Paternoster Press, 1978)
Martinez, Florentino Garcia, The Dead Sea Scrolls Translated: The Qumran Texts in English, trans. by Wilfred G. E. Watson (E. J. Brill, 1994)
Meier, John P., ‘The Circle of the Twelve: Did It Exist during Jesus’ Public Ministry?’, Journal of Biblical Literature, 116.4 (1997), pp. 635–72, doi:10.2307/3266551
Morales, L. Michael, Numbers 1-19, Apollos Old Testament Commentary (Apollos, 2024)
Morris, Leon, The Gospel According to John, The New International Commentary on the New Testament, Revised (Eerdmans, 1995)
Motyer, Alec, Isaiah, Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries (Inter-Varsity Press, 1999)
Mounce, Robert H., The Book of Revelation, The New International Commentary on the New Testament (Eerdmans, 1977)
Mowry, Lucetta, The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Early Church (University of Chicago Press, 1962)
O’Kennedy, D. F., ‘The Shepherd Imagery in Zechariah 9-14’, pt 404-421, Old Testament Essays, 22.2 (2009)
Paul, Ian, Revelation, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Inter-Varsity Press, 2018)
Rengstorf, Karl Heinrich, Apostleship, trans. by J. R. Coates (1933; Adam and Charles Black, 1952)
Sanders, E. P., Jesus and Judaism (SCM Press, 1985)
Schmithals, Walter, The Office of Apostle in the Early Church, trans. by John E. Steely (SPCK, 1971)
Speiser, E. A., ‘Background and Function of the Biblical Nāśī’’, The Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 25.1 (1963), pp. 111–17
Stott, John, The Message of Acts, The Bible Speaks Today (Inter-Varsity Press, 1990)
The Holy Bible Containing the Old and New Testaments: New Revised Standard Edition, (Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1989)
Thompson, J. A., The Book of Jeremiah, The New International Commentary on the Old Testament (Eerdmans, 1980)
Vancil, Jack W., ‘Sheep, Shepherd’, in The Anchor Bible Dictionary, ed. by David Noel Freedman (Doubleday, 1992)
Wright, Christopher J. H., The Message of Ezekiel, The Bible Speaks Today (Inter-Varsity Press, 2001)
——, The Mission of God: Unlocking the Bible’s Grand Narrative (IVP Academic, 2006)
Wright, N. T., Jesus and the Victory of God (SPCK, 1996)
[1] Throughout I will use the substantive adjective ‘apostolic’ to encapsulate apostles, apostleship, and apostolic vocation.
[2] Especially with respect to ‘fivefold ministry.’ Consider, for instance, Alan Hirsch, 5Q: Reactivating the Original Intelligence and Capacity of the Body of Christ, (100 Movements, 2017)
[3] Throughout, I will use the phrase ‘the Twelve’ to refer to this cohort who at various points are more properly ‘disciples’, or ‘apostles.’
[4] NB. The Nicene Creed: ‘one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church.’
[5] See Kenneth E. Kirk, ‘The Apostolic Ministry’, in The Apostolic Ministry: Essays on the History and The Doctrine of Episcopacy, ed. by Kirk, Kenneth E. (Hodder & Stoughton, 1946), p. 8; See also A. M. Farrer, ‘The Ministry in the New Testament’, in The Apostolic Ministry: Essays on the History and The Doctrine of Episcopacy, ed. by Kenneth E. Kirk (Hodder & Stoughton, 1946), p. 115, who ponders Catholic order ‘moulded by the genius of the Gospel.’
[6] e.g. Dom Gregory Dix, ‘The Ministry in the Early Church’, in The Apostolic Ministry: Essays on the History and The Doctrine of Episcopacy, ed. by Kenneth E. Kirk (Hodder & Stoughton, 1946), p. 194, recognises ‘sacramental laying on of hands’ was ‘taken over from Judaism.’
[7] Farrer, ‘The Ministry in the New Testament’, p. 8 references ‘the institution of sacrifice.’
[8] Dix, ‘The Ministry in the Early Church’, p. 189.
[9] Ibid., p. 228.
[10] See also Kirk, ‘The Apostolic Ministry’, p. 10 who notes that the ‘The shaliach duties of the apostles […] must have been handed on […] to the resident bishops.’
[11] Dix, ‘The Ministry in the Early Church’, p. 216; See also Kirk, ‘The Apostolic Ministry’, p. 13.
[12] Kevin Giles, ‘Apostles Before and After Paul’, Churchman, 99.3 (1985), pp. 241–56 (pp. 250–51), outlines some examples of how this plays out in church history.
[13] Walter Schmithals, The Office of Apostle in the Early Church, trans. by John E. Steely (SPCK, 1971), p. 92.
[14] Ibid., p. 94.
[15] Ibid., p. 23, ‘Apostles are [...] missionaries [...] not all missionaries are also apostles.’
[16] Ibid., p. 79, Paul understands he is the last.
[17] Ibid., p. 31, Paul is ‘the direct mediator’.
[18] Ibid., p. 113.
[19] Ibid., p. 115.
[20] Ibid., p. 178.
[21] Ibid., p. 71; see also pp. 67, 88.
[22] See J. Andrew Kirk, ‘Apostleship since Rengstorf: Towards a Synthesis’, New Testament Studies, 21.2 (1975), pp. 249–64 (p. 258), doi:10.1017/S0028688500010997.
[23] For similar arguments see ibid., p. 253; And also John P. Meier, ‘The Circle of the Twelve: Did It Exist during Jesus’ Public Ministry?’, Journal of Biblical Literature, 116.4 (1997), pp. 635–72 (p. 671), doi:10.2307/3266551.
[24] Karl Heinrich Rengstorf, Apostleship, trans. by J. R. Coates (1933; Adam and Charles Black, 1952).
[25] Ibid., p. 3 explicitly rejecting Greek origins.
[26] Ibid., p. 4.
[27] Ibid., pp. 12–13.
[28] Ibid., p. 14.
[29] C. John Collins, ‘שלח’, in New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology & Exegesis, ed. by Willem A. VanGemeren (Zondervan, 1997), iv, p. 123.
[30] F. S. Malan, ‘The Relationship Between Apostolate and Office in the Theology of Paul’, Neotestamentica, 10 (1976), pp. 53–68 (p. 57) summarizes Schmithals and others.
[31] See Schmithals, The Office of Apostle, pp. 105, 109. This is one of his reasons to reject Jewish origins.
[32] Rengstorf, Apostleship, p. 44.
[33] Ibid., p. 21.
[34] Ibid., p. 30.
[35] The Holy Bible Containing the Old and New Testaments: New Revised Standard Edition, (Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1989), John 20.21 - ‘As the Father has sent me, so I send you.’
[36] Rengstorf, Apostleship, p. 27.
[37] Ibid., p. 38.
[38] See Giles, ‘Apostles Before and After Paul’, p. 244.
[39] Rengstorf, Apostleship, pp. 41–42 where he notes ‘The fact of the Risen Lord meant also the renewal of their commission as apostles in its final form.’
[40] Arnold Ehrhardt, The Apostolic Succession in the First Two Centuries of the Church (Lutterworth Press, 1953), p. 16 and p.18 where he notes ‘the term apostolos was earlier than the term shaliach.’
[41] NRSV, Matthew 10.1.
[42] There is some variation of exact names between accounts but this does not detract substantially. See Meier, ‘The Circle of the Twelve’, p. 646.
[43] See also Mark 13.16-19; Luke 6.14-16.
[44] ἐξουσία, Luke adds δύναμις in Luke 9.1.
[45] Matthew 10.6; Luke 9.2; Mark 3.14, 6.7 has variants of the same stem.
[46] The narrative uses the genitive: δώδεκα ἀποστόλων.
[47] Matthew 10.40 quoted in Giles, ‘Apostles Before and After Paul’, p. 242.
[48] Giles, ‘Apostles Before and After Paul’, p. 243.
[49] Ibid., p. 242 amongst many others, notes this.
[50] NRSV, Luke 6.13.
[51] Ibid., Mark 3.14.
[52] E. P. Sanders, Jesus and Judaism (SCM Press, 1985), p. 91 notes how the apostolic age is ‘set in a framework of Jewish eschatological expectation.’
[53] Giles, ‘Apostles Before and After Paul’, p. 244; See also Sanders, Jesus and Judaism, p. 98.
[54] NRSV, Matthew 4.13.
[55] A. S. Geyser, ‘Jesus, the Twelve and the Twelve Tribes in Matthew’, Neotestamentica, 12 (1978), pp. 1–19 (p. 6).
[56] Michael Green, The Message of Matthew, The Bible Speaks Today (Inter-Varsity Press, 2000), p. 85 unpacks the creative tension here.
[57] NRSV, Matthew 19.28. See also Luke 22.28-30.
[58] I. Howard Marshall, The Gospel of Luke, The New International Greek Testament Commentary (The Paternoster Press, 1978), p. 814.
[59] Meier, ‘The Circle of the Twelve’, pp. 657–58.
[60] Giles, ‘Apostles Before and After Paul’, p. 245.
[61] Dix, ‘The Ministry in the Early Church’, p. 230.
[62] Giles, ‘Apostles Before and After Paul’, p. 244.
[63] NRSV, Revelation 4.4.
[64] Ian Paul, Revelation, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Inter-Varsity Press, 2018), p. 123; Joseph L. Mangina, Revelation, Brazos Theological Commentary on the Bible (Brazos Press, 2010), p. 77; Robert H. Mounce, The Book of Revelation, The New International Commentary on the New Testament (Eerdmans, 1977), p. 135.
[65] See Paul, Revelation, p. 123; Also see Joseph M. Baumgarten, ‘The Duodecimal Courts of Qumran, Revelation, and the Sanhedrin’, Journal of Biblical Literature, 95.1 (1976), pp. 59–78 (p. 66), doi:10.2307/3265473 who strangely suggests few commentators make this correlation.
[66] Baumgarten, ‘The Duodecimal Courts of Qumran, Revelation, and the Sanhedrin’, pp. 66–67.
[67] NRSV, Revelation 21.12-14.
[68] J. A. Draper, ‘The Twelve Apostles as Foundation Stones of the Heavenly Jerusalem and the Foundation of the Qumran Community’, Neotestamentica, 22.1 (1988), pp. 41–63 (p. 43).
[69] See Paul, Revelation, p. 349; also Mounce, The Book of Revelation, p. 379.
[70] Paul, Revelation, p. 349; See also Draper, ‘The Twelve Apostles as Foundation Stones’, p. 43.
[71] Lucetta Mowry, The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Early Church (University of Chicago Press, 1962), p. 4 speaks of the ‘backdrop for the stage of the New Testament drama’ referencing T. H. Gaster, The Dead Sea Scriptures (New York, 1956), pp. 2,12.
[72] Florentino Garcia Martinez, The Dead Sea Scrolls Translated: The Qumran Texts in English, trans. by Wilfred G. E. Watson (E. J. Brill, 1994), p. 96 The War Scroll, 1QM II 1.
[73] Geyser, ‘Jesus, the Twelve and the Twelve Tribes in Matthew’, p. 8 points out how ‘they organized their daily lives in a division of twelve.’
[74] e.g. Martinez, The Dead Sea Scrolls, p. 98, The War Scroll, 1QM V 1, sees ‘the names of the twelve tribes of Israel’ on the shield of the Prince.
[75] Ibid., p. 126, The Rule of the Congregation, 1QSa I.1.
[76] Ibid., p. 127, The Rule of the Congregation, 1QSa II 11-15.
[77] Ibid., pp. 190–91, The Isaiah Pesher, 4Q164 [4QpIsd] Frag. 1 4-7.
[78] David Flusser, ‘The Isaiah Pesher and the Notion of Twelve Apostles in the Early Church’, in Judaism of the Second Temple Period, Vol 1: Qumran and Apocalypticism, trans. by Azzan Yadin (Eerdmans, 2007), p. 324.
[79] Baumgarten, ‘The Duodecimal Courts of Qumran, Revelation, and the Sanhedrin’, p. 78.
[80] Geyser, ‘Jesus, the Twelve and the Twelve Tribes in Matthew’, p. 9.
[81] Flusser, ‘The Isaiah Pesher and the Notion of Twelve Apostles in the Early Church’, p. 311.
[82] NRSV, Genesis 46.5.
[83] Ibid., Genesis 49:28.
[84] The Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon (1906; Seventh printing, Hendrickson, 2003), p. 986, שֵׁ֫בֶט.
[85] L. Michael Morales, Numbers 1-19, Apollos Old Testament Commentary (Apollos, 2024), p. 2.
[86] Ibid., p. 3 referring to the Hebrew title given to the book of Numbers.
[87] Ibid., p. 10 is of the view that leadership is one of the central issues of the book of Numbers.
[88] Exodus 3.15,16; 12.21; 17.5,6; 18.12; 24.1, 9 sometimes ‘elders of the sons of Israel’ זִקְנֵ֖י בְּנֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵֽל, Exodus 4.29.
[89] BDB, p. 278, זָקֵן.
[90] Exodus 24:1, 14. In Genesis 46, the counting of Jacob’s wider family totals seventy, including daughters. Note N.T. allusions, e.g. the mission of Luke 10. The motif of seventy is worthy of further study.
[91] Exodus 16.22; 34:31; Joshua 9:18.
[92] BDB, p. 417 allows for ‘the company of Israel of the Exodus’ in 3. עֵדָה.
[93] NRSV, Numbers 1.1-16.
[94] BDB, p. 672, נָשִׂיא.
[95] Morales, Numbers 1-19, p. 5 refers to the nesi’im as ‘central players at the Dwelling [...] the chieftains of the camp.’
[96] BDB, p. 641, מַטֶּה.
[97] crf. Romans 11.17-24.
[98] BDB, pp. 910–11, רֹאשׁ.
[99] Ibid., pp. 48–49, אֶ֫לֶף.
[100] See Timothy R. Ashley, The Book of Numbers, The New International Commentary on the Old Testament (Eerdmans, 1993), p. 48; Morales, Numbers 1-19, p. 84. Both recognise (in a different order) ‘clans’ and ‘father’s houses.’
[101] See Deuteronomy 1.15 which has arrangements by thousands, hundreds, fifties, etc.
[102] Ashley, Numbers, p. 54; See also Morales, Numbers 1-19, p. 76.
[103] NRSV, Numbers 1.16.
[104] BDB, p. 896, קָרִיא.
[105] e.g. E. A. Speiser, ‘Background and Function of the Biblical Nāśī’’, The Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 25.1 (1963), pp. 111–17 (p. 114).
[106] See Numbers 34.16-29 where they apportionment the land, also Joshua 14.1.
[107] NRSV, Numbers 30.1; 32.28.
[108] Ibid., Joshua 22.30.
[109] Deuteronomy 5.23.
[110] Exodus 35.27.
[111] Numbers 7.
[112] Morales, Numbers 1-19, p. 84.
[113] Ibid., p.84.
[114] With respect to Jewish expectation consider Baumgarten, ‘The Duodecimal Courts of Qumran, Revelation, and the Sanhedrin’, p. 67 who notes ‘the participation of the elders in the final judgment.’
[115] Morales, Numbers 1-19, p. 21 referencing the imagery in Revelation.
[116] Ibid., p. 18; it is a ‘novum, a sum greater than its parts, a complete cosmos.’
[117] Ibid., pp. 19–20 lays out the evidence here; this is but a cursory glance.
[118] Ibid., pp. 25–26.
[119] Ibid., p. 28 where he goes into much more detail.
[120] Ibid., p. 30ff.
[121] NRSV, Numbers 1.12.
[122] See Numbers 9.17. Morales, Numbers 1-19, p. 31 references Numbers 2.17.
[123] Flusser, ‘The Isaiah Pesher and the Notion of Twelve Apostles in the Early Church’, p. 318 is even more explicit, that Jesus is effectively appointing the twelve as ‘chiefs of the tribes of Israel.’
[124] e.g. Alec Motyer, Isaiah, Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries (Inter-Varsity Press, 1999), p. 388; Brevard S. Childs, Isaiah, The Old Testament Library (Westminster John Knox Press, 2001), p. 524 see this in Isaiah 63.11.
[125] Christopher J. H. Wright, The Message of Ezekiel, The Bible Speaks Today (Inter-Varsity Press, 2001), p. 274 sees a reference to ‘the kings of Judah for the century or more prior to the fall.’; Similarly Jack W. Vancil, ‘Sheep, Shepherd’, in The Anchor Bible Dictionary, ed. by David Noel Freedman (Doubleday, 1992), p. 1190.
[126] Martinez, The Dead Sea Scrolls, p. 43, The Damascus Document, CD XIII.6.
[127] See e.g. D. F. O’Kennedy, ‘The Shepherd Imagery in Zechariah 9-14’, pt 404-421, Old Testament Essays, 22.2 (2009), p. 411 commenting on Zec 10.3. Earlier, p. 404, he recognises that more generally the image can apply to ‘prophets, judges and other biblical leaders.’
[128] Consider Vancil, ‘Sheep, Shepherd’, p. 1190 who sees it attached to ‘didactic leader’, conqueror, ‘davidic king’ and ‘prophets and priests.’
[129] Ibid., p. 1189 references Jeremiah 2.8; 3.15; 10.21; 25.34-38; crf. J. A. Thompson, The Book of Jeremiah, The New International Commentary on the Old Testament (Eerdmans, 1980), p. 202 restricts shepherds in 3.15 to kingly rulers, illustrating that but not justifying it. Ronald E. Clements, Jeremiah: Interpretation: A Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching (Westminster John Knox Press, 2011), 21:1-23:8 The Faithless Leaders <<https://research.ebsco.com/linkprocessor/plink?id=f80db9a5-c6f5-306b-b794-a4e56ce4b092>> [accessed 23 April 2026] concurs with Vancil, that the image is ‘sufficiently undefined to be applicable to leaders of many kinds’; N. T. Wright, Jesus and the Victory of God (SPCK, 1996), p. 534 also concurs, that the shepherd image ‘could be used for the ruling nobility in general.’
[130] NRSV, Jeremiah 3.15-18.
[131] See Acts 13.22 which references this Davidic figure. Also, among many examples, John 8.8-29, where Jesus testifies to his complete alignment with the Father’s will.
[132] Leon Morris, The Gospel According to John, The New International Commentary on the New Testament, Revised (Eerdmans, 1995), p. 644.
[133] BDB, p. 944, רָעָה.
[134] NRSV, John 21:15b; Morris, The Gospel According to John, p. 771 is unequivocal that ‘Peter is being commissioned to tend the flock of Christ.’
[135] NRSV, Matthew 28.20.
[136] Mitch Glaser, ‘Great Commission and the Coming Kingdom: Matthew 28:18-20’, section 3, Journal of Messianic Jewish Studies., Biola University Archives and Special Collections, 1 (2015), p. 27 <https://jstor.org/stable/community.39141558> [accessed 24 April 2026].
[137] Thompson, Jeremiah, p. 202 speaks of an ‘enlarged’ ‘picture of the days of restoration.’
[138] Genesis 1.22; 1.28.
[139] Genesis 8.17; 9.1.
[140] Genesis 17.20; 28.30; 35.11; 47.27.
[141] Exodus 1.7; Leviticus 26.9.
[142] Gregory K. Beale, The Temple and the Church’s Mission: A Biblical Theology of the Dwelling Place of God (Apollos, 2006), ch. 5 <https://research.ebsco.com/linkprocessor/plink?id=44dcfcdf-47d8-399d-bd7d-9c23bf911041> [accessed 24 April 2026].
[143] Christopher J. H. Wright, The Mission of God: Unlocking the Bible’s Grand Narrative (IVP Academic, 2006), p. 355.
[144] M. Haran, ‘The Disappearance of the Ark’, Israel Exploration Journal, 13.1 (1963), pp. 46–58 (p. 51) emphasises the factural loss. Janusz Lemański, ‘“No One Will Say Anymore: The Ark of the Covenant of YHWH.” Jeremiah 3:16 and Its Significance for the Tradition of the Ark of the Covenant’, Verbum Vitae, 43.4 (2025), pp. 1209–22 (p. 1211), doi:10.31743/vv.19099 sees a balance; it had disappeared but ‘was no longer needed.’
[145] Thompson, Jeremiah, p. 202.
[146] e.g. Lemański, ‘No One Will Say Anymore’, p. 1212 see it ‘representing YHWH himself or his presence.’
[147] NRSV, Matthew 28:20b; Wright, The Mission of God, p. 355 speaks of this as ‘covenantal blessing par excellence.’ See also his summary on p. 512.
[148] NRSV, Revelation 21.24.
[149] Genesis 18.18; 22.18; 26.4. Note also Wright, Jesus and the Victory of God, p. 309 who summarises: ‘When YHWH finally acted for Israel, the Gentiles would be blessed as well.’
[150] Wright, The Mission of God, p. 478 acknowledges the ‘sheer volume’ of such texts.
[151] See Matthew 28.19, note that Luke 24.47 uses the phrase identically.
[152] See Wright, The Mission of God, p. 501ff in the light of his preceding chapter for an excellent exposition of this.
[153] John Stott, The Message of Acts, The Bible Speaks Today (Inter-Varsity Press, 1990), p. 247.
[154] See Wright, The Mission of God, p. 504ff.
[155] Ibid., p. 489.
[156] Thompson, Jeremiah, p. 203.
[157] Wright, Jesus and the Victory of God, p. 268.
[158] NRSV, Matthew 10.5.
[159] Geyser, ‘Jesus, the Twelve and the Twelve Tribes in Matthew’, pp. 2–4.
[160] e.g. Acts 14.1; 17.1.
[161] NRSV, Galatians 2.9.
[162] Strictly, the Eleven, as Judas is excluded at this point.