The Thirteen Apostles

The Thirteen Apostles

In this engaging book from popular author J. Ellsworth Kalas, a portrait of each of Jesus' apostle as a servant in ministry, a human being, and individual are drawn from Scripture as well as historical writings and tradition. A chapter is also devoted to Mathias, the successor to Judas Iscariot. Each chapter features a key passage of Scripture. A study guide is included Kalas breathes fresh life into the faith of the men who journeyed with Jesus. J. Ellsworth Kalas (1923-2015) was the author of over 35 books, including the popular Back Side series, A Faith of Her Own: Women of the Old Testament, Strong Was Her Faith: Women of the New Testament, I Bought a House on Gratitude Street, and the Christian Believer study, and was a presenter on DISCIPLE videos. He was part of the faculty of Asbury Theological Seminary since 1993, formerly serving as president and then as senior professor of homiletics. He was a United Methodist pastor for 38 years and also served five years in evangelism with the World Methodist Council. The Thirteen Apostles By J. Ellsworth Kalas Abingdon Press Copyright © 2012 Abingdon Press All rights reserved. ISBN: 978-1-4267-5358-9 Contents Introduction, Chapter 1: Andrew, a Brother, Chapter 2: Peter, Man of Action, Chapter 3: James, Unfulfilled Leader, Chapter 4: Philip, the Deliberate, Chapter 5: James the Less, Chapter 6: Simon, the Zealot, Chapter 7: Nathanael, the Forthright, Chapter 8: Matthew, the Successful Man, Chapter 9: Thomas, Twenty-first-Century Man, Chapter 10: Thaddaeus, the Questioner, Chapter 11: Judas, the Value of a Dollar, Chapter 12: John, Love and Thunder, Chapter 13: Matthias, Holy Substitute, Study Guide, CHAPTER 1 Andrew, a Brother Read John 1:35-42. I would like to have had Andrew for a brother. If I had known the apostles, I would have chosen John for stimulating conversation, and Matthew for financial counsel. And Peter, of course, for outrageous talk, those remarks that push the boundaries of conversation. But for a friend and brother, I would choose Andrew. Is that reason enough to use Andrew as the starting point for a book on the apostles? Not just of itself, perhaps, although when I look back on the patterns of my life, people who classify as friends and brothers and sisters rank very high in my catalog of value. But of course the best reason for starting with Andrew is because Jesus did. According to the New Testament records, Andrew was the first of the Twelve whom Jesus called. Early church writings frequently refer to Andrew by the Greek title Protokletos, which means "first-called." You and I might want to argue that Andrew was the first called. As far as I can see, he had little obvious claim to greatness. The Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke mention him only to list his name among the Twelve. This is also the way he is mentioned in the book of Acts, and there just once. It is only John's Gospel that brings Andrew out of the background, even momentarily. In the language of a dramatist, Andrew appears in the first three Gospels and in Acts as someone listed in the crowd scenes. In the Gospel of John, he emerges three times as a supporting actor. But never, never does Andrew play a leading role. He is part of a larger group, or he is a supporting player, and that's it. But a significant, beautiful word is almost always connected with the name of Andrew, and that word shows how great a soul he was: Brother. Andrew, a brother. As I've already said, Andrew is mentioned only a few times in the New Testament, and in a good share of these citings he is designated in this fashion: "Andrew, Simon Peter's brother." It's as if the writers were saying, "If you want to identify Andrew, here's the point of reference: He's a brother of the great Simon Peter." With that statement I have probably demonstrated more clearly than ever that Andrew isn't the proper starting point for an apostolic study. If his only achievement is that he was a brother to a great man—well, unless you are a student of sibling rivalries you will figure that history is full of its Andrews. And most of them, of course, are unknown to us. As you know, we use the word brother primarily in two ways. Sometimes it indicates a family relationship, to describe two persons who have the same parents or who are joined by adoption. If Andrew's only claim to the "brother" title were his blood tie with Simon Peter, the whole thing would be worth no more than a passing reference. But we also use the term in an emotional or a poetic sense, to describe someone with certain qualities of loyalty, compassion, and concern. Thus we say of some persons, "I tell you, when I was in trouble he was a real brother to me." Or we make an adjective of the quality and praise someone by saying, "He's a very brotherly sort." I say all of this cautiously, since I'm a man, and these remarks may be seen as sexist prejudice. I'm not sure why "sisterly" has never gotten the same