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 Christian 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, including 1 Thessalonians: 1, 1 Corinthians: 10, 2 Corinthians: 7, Galatians: 3, Romans: 3, Philippians: 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 continuing 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 contemporary 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 Apostelbegriff 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 Theologie," 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 commissioned 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 Lukasevangelium (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 regarded 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 backgrounds, 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 understanding of the whole subject, providing a context in which the more significant 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 lifetime 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 seriously questioned; see especially P. Vielhauer, "Gottesreich und Menschensohn," in Festschrift
fr Gnter Dehn (Neukirchen: Moers, 1957) 51-79. But, with the decline of historical skepticism 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 devel
opments. 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 qualification, 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 suggested 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 several writers mark stages in the development of this theory. Their studies are
primarily influenced by the image of the apostle in the NT narrative literature. 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 phenomenological 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" 41324; 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. LonDufour, 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 Christianorum (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 significance 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 antedated 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 slahconvention 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 bekannt", 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 conjunction 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, "Apostlos," 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 currency 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 appearance 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 synoptic 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 Epaphroditus, 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 bevollmchtigte 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 lifetime 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 substantially 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 connection 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 Gemeindeverfassung 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: Wissen
schaftliche 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 Testament 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 Thessaloniciens (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 rabbinic 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 repeated. 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 denied 50 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 evidence is that of W. Schmithals. Starting from the Pauline literature, he
describes apostleship in eighteen points. 53 Later, after describing theslahfigure and convention, he compares it to this description of apostleship
from the authentic Paul. Some of the more significant elements of the comparison 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 categorically: "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.
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.
48

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 correspondence 61 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 considerable influence. But Schmithals's own theory has found little support. 62
55

Office, 105.
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 convaincrons 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) Soleo; 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).
56

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 creation 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 apostleconcept 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 apostleconcept. 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 arguments 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 particularly 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
64

Office, 58-95.
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 redeemerfigure 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 terminology 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 apostleconcept. However, there has been little effort to specify further the circumstances 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 slahconcept. With some variation, their tendency is to concentrate less on the
65

Office, 115.
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.
66

Agnew: The NT Apostle-Concept

91

specific significance of the slah-Rgure of rabbinic times for their argument. 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 position. 73 G. Schule, in criticism of Klein and Schmithals, offers a very carefully 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 apostleconcept 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.

"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 Auferstandenen in Entsprechung zur Sendung der alttestamentlichen Propheten verstanden
wurde. Beides geht auf dieselbe Wurzel zurck, nmlich auf den Grundsatz von der im Auftrag 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;
72

92

Journal of Biblical Literature

writers largely repeat the arguments outlined above 77

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. Schmithals'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 development 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 Bultmannians, began to make itself felt in this area of discussion. The scholars
who have revived the theory that apostleship is connected with the sendingconvention 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. Schneemelcher; 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, Apostolat, 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 problematical 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 sendingconvention 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 beiseitelassen. . . . Zur Beantwortung stellen wir die Evangelien zunchst ganz zurck und beschrnken 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 maintained 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 Gerhardsson 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 apostleconcept, 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 "community 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 religious. 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 /prophtes, 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 connection 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 wellknown 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.
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 JohannesEvangelium (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 'messianique' 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 'apocalypse,'" 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 connection 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 understanding 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.
89

Journal of Biblical Literature

96

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 sendingconvention 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 sendingconvention 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.