5

In Matthew 10:2-4 the disciples are listed in pairs (presumably parallel to the "two by two" of Mark 6:7):

Matthew 10:2-4 (ESV)

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

The pairing of brothers (Simon and Andrew; James and John) is obvious. Based on his surname of Iscariot, it has been speculated that Judas might have been a Zealot. If that speculation is true, half of the pairings have an obvious choose-your-lab-partner character. Are there any additional indications that the other pairings were of this nature or that the pairings overall were not arbitrary?

Improve this question
5
  • Feel free to add appropriate tags. Also, I was not certain that BH.SE was a better fit for this question than Christianity.SE.
    – user5720
    Commented Aug 16, 2014 at 20:06
  • You're in the right place! It's an interesting question. I just added the biblical text, but feel free to change to a different translation if you prefer. Could you make explicit the connection between Iscariot and Zealot? This is not obvious to me, although perhaps it is to some...
    – Susan
    Commented Aug 16, 2014 at 21:24
  • @Susan A quick googling found {this page](bibletools.org/index.cfm/fuseaction/Topical.show/RTD/cgg/ID/654/…) which uses the second etymology mentioned in Wikipedia. Even the more likely (?) "of Kerioth" etymology might have made Judas friendlier (as a "true Judean") to a Zealot.
    – user5720
    Commented Aug 16, 2014 at 23:15
  • Upvoted. Very interesting qns! Will look into it myself :)
    – Zoe
    Commented Aug 17, 2014 at 7:05
  • As a tax collector, Matthew would be expected to be a "by the numbers" man. Thomas, as we see in John, is a "I have to see it" man. That could be a reason to pair them.
    – Frank Luke
    Commented Aug 18, 2014 at 16:37

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
1

For the names of the 12 apostles we have four different lists: Mt. 10:2-4, Mk 3:16-29, Lk 6:14-16 and Ac 1:13. They differ in the order, and also in some of the names. The pairing of Simon Peter and his brother Andrew is in Mt and Lk, but not in Mc and Ac, where they are 1st and 4th in the list. So I think this casts some doubt concerning any intrinsic pairing of the names.

Improve this answer
1
  • The Mark and Luke lists do not use pairing (other than brothers). The list in Acts does have a different grouping, but it is also in a different context (one might assume the Mt. list is the "two by two" traveling pairs of Mk. 6:7). Your point has weight (especially since to grouping of the brothers is natural in any listing and the Zealot-friendliness of Judas. is moot), but I was hoping for firmer evidence of arbitrariness, corroboration of the "lab partner" theory or a third option. E.g., if Thomas had reason to pair w/ a tax collector (and not just last chooser gets the dud ☺).
    – user5720
    Commented Aug 16, 2014 at 23:36

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.