From Hero to Obscurity

Words often have many meanings. We hear hero we may each draw a different picture in our mind. It is the same with the term obscurity. Erase what you may be thinking for these are the synonyms I want you to accept, hero as celebrity and obscurity as inconspicuous.

This is the case with twelve men Jesus selected to be Apostles. Some stood out and today we might call them stars -- Peter, John, James. Others hovered in the background on the border of anonymity -- Simon Zealotes, Lebbaeus, James ben Alphaeus. The rest occasionally stepped to center stage and had their 15 minutes of fame, then retreated again into the background. One gained eternal infamy.

Of course, the "stars" we know quite a bit about. They are all over the Gospels and even wrote some books of their own. The "obscurity", not so much, which is why they are obscure. You can Google these fellows and maybe find a lot of verbiage about each, long entries in Wikipedia perhaps. But if you read carefully, as you should, somewhere in the articles will be the phrases, "According to tradition" or "the legends say".  For my purpose here I prefer to stay only with what the Gospels and Book of Acts tell us.

I just want to talk about Jesus' meeting these guys. So for the moment, let's settle back in our seats, with our popcorn and juju fruits and watch a film or two or three portraying the "calling". 

The scene begins with this Hippie-looking guy, long hair and beard flowing in the sea breeze, blue eyes reflecting the water, strolling down the beach. He is all sunshine and flowers. He looks over and sees several fisherman fooling around with their nets. He waves and calls out, "Follow me and I will make you fishers of men!" The men immediately drop their gear, dash across the sand and off they go, a jolly band. 

Next scene, Jesus traipsing across a hill side in silhouette against the sun with twelve men single file ambling behind. 

Wow, that Jesus had some charisma! What did he do hypnotize those fishermen?

As usual the Hollywood take and the public perception of Biblical events is a wee off.

First of all, that calling by the Sea of Galilee only involved four of the twelve and it wasn't Jesus' first contact with them. (Read what really happened at "Jesus Calls His First Disciples" in Nitewrit's Own Companion and Commentary of the Gospels.) 


The four men Jesus called to follow him that day were two sets of brothers, Simon Peter and Andrew, and James and John. Three of these Jesus had met about a year earlier and he had probably spent a good deal of time with them over that period. John and Andrew were the two followers of John the Baptist, who had pointed Jesus out to them after Jesus came out of the wilderness. Andrew fetched his brother  Simon and they spent the rest of the day with Jesus. (Read John 1:35-51.)  James is never mentioned as being there, one of the few times in the Gospels where James and John aren't mentioned together. Perhaps James had stayed home to tend the business. Probably John filled him in when he got home and both brothers spoke with and traveled with Jesus during the coming year.

It was in Bethany at this same time that Jesus met Philip of Bethsaida and Nathanael Bartholomew of Cana. We do not know what Philip and Nathanael Bartholomew did for a living. Bartholomew is the Greek for the Aramaic "bar Tolomy", so his name was Nathanael son of Tolmay. Tolmay might have been his father's name. Tolmay also translates as "furrows; thus Bartholomew can be "son of the furrows", thus his occupation might have been farming. We know he was from Cana from later Scripture, after Christ's resurrection when Jesus meets five Apostles along the sea. These four are listed (John 21) as the two sons of Zebedee (James and John), Nathanael of Cana in Galilee and two others. One of the others is quickly revealed to be Simon Peter. The other is not identified. Perhaps it was Peter's brother Andrew or maybe it was Philip. Nathanael and Philip seemed to be close friends.

It is very likely these four men had traveled to Bethany together to be with John the Baptist. It is plain from the text they were seeking the Messiah, so they had a common purpose. This also indicates these were devout Jews who knew Scripture and prophesy. They knew the time was ripe for the appearance of the Messiah. Philip lived in Bethsaida and so did John and Peter. Nathanial lived not far away in Cana.

When these four (assuming James was not there with John) accompanied Jesus back to Galilee, their first stop was at a wedding in Cana. Some have even speculated this was the marriage of Nathanael, but that would not fit the wedding customs of those times. Most likely they went to the wedding because Jesus was invited. His mother was involved in it. It was convenient to leave Nathanael there in his home town.
(You can read the full story of these meetings and early travels with Jesus in my Companion.)

So, to recap, before this so-called calling of the Apostles, Jesus had already befriended and spent time teaching six of them: Simon Peter, Andrew, James, John, Philip and Nathaneal Bartholomew. On the day along the seashore when he said, "Follow me and I will make you fishers of me," it was to the first four in this group. These four are always listed first in the listings of the twelve, with Peter always at the top. We hear more about these four throughout the Gospels than any of the others, although not as much of Andrew as the other three. Even so, there are passages indicating Andrew was included is private conversations between Jesus and this group.

As Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives opposite the temple, Peter, James, John and Andrew asked him privately, “Tell us, when will these things happen? And what will be the sign that they are all about to be fulfilled?” Mark 13:3-4


Andrew may have been something of a gatekeeper at the top. He would interact between others.

The first thing Andrew did was to find his brother Simon and tell him, “We have found the Messiah” (that is, the Christ). And he brought him to Jesus. John 1:41-42

Now there were some Greeks among those who went up to worship at the festival. They came to Philip, who was from Bethsaida in Galilee, with a request. “Sir,” they said, “we would like to see Jesus.” Philip went to tell Andrew; Andrew and Philip in turn told Jesus. John 12:20-22

The second group that are always named together are Philip, Nathanael Bartholomew, Matthew and Thomas, with Philip always listed first. If the first group are the heros, the stars, these are those who get a scene or two in the limelight throughout the Gospels. Like the four stars, two of these fellows knew Jesus from the time he had been Baptized by John and returned from the wilderness. When Jesus actually called them to follow on his ministries, we do not know. It may not have been long after he called the first four off their boats.

The only other of the Apostles where we have information about him being met by Jesus and called is Matthew Levi. Jesus had come off a boat into Capernaum, where he was living then, he stopped by a paralyzed man and had a confrontation with some teachers of the law. After curing the man, Jesus went on into town and saw this tax collector at his collection booth. He called to this man to follow him and the man did. His name was Matthew (also Levi). Right after this Jesus has dinner at Matthew's home along with other tax collectors. Here he has a confrontation with the Pharisees over the company he keeps.

This is all we know about any of the "callings" of the Apostles.

The last member of this middle group is Thomas, known as Doubting Thomas to most and also known as Didymus, which is the Greek for Thomas. The name means "The Twin". We don't know if Thomas was actually a twin or not. We also don't know where Thomas was from, what he did for a living, where he met Jesus or how he was called.

The last group I haven't called The Obscurity for nothing. About all we know of these, with the exception of Judas Iscariot, is the names. They appear in the lists of the twelve, always with James son of Alphaeus listed first. We do not know when Jesus met or called these people.

It would seem it was in proximity of when he called the others. It is not that far into his first Galilean ministry when he calls them together and selects them as Apostles.

So you see, the calling of the Apostles is a bit more complex than usually presented in pop culture.  In fact, even the term of Apostle is misunderstood. First these men were disciples, along with perhaps many other people. A disciple is a student, someone learning from the teacher. When Jesus called Peter, Andrew, James and John to follow they did so as disciples. After some time went by, Jesus called a number of his disciples to a private place on a mount and there he select twelve to be Apostles. Although Apostles may continue being disciples, that is still learning, disciples aren't necessarily Apostles. Apostles are Messengers, people capable to taking the message to others and teaching others to be disciples. These men were called to be disciples, they were selected to be Apostles.

On the Road and In Your Face

Over the course of my life I have heard people talk about the God of the Old Testament and the God of the New Testament. Jehovah is the angry, condemning one and Jesus is the loving, forgiving one. They will say, "I can't believe in that mean old man pointing his finger and sending people to Hell, but I think Jesus was a good guy and he said we shouldn't judge anyone."

I'm afraid I have good news and bad news for these people. There is only one God and his nature doesn't change. Anyone who hasn't seen the loving, forgiving God of the Old Testament hasn't thought about what they've read. Those who haven't sometimes seen an angry and condemning Jesus haven't either. This is bad news because they are wrong about God; it's good news because He will forgive them if they realize it.

Jesus was not a flower child. He was not handing out happy pills and saying, "Can't we all just get along?" He did not say to the adulterous woman, who the Pharisees wished to stone, "Go and do what you please. Be happy." He didn't even say, "I forgive you." He said, "Neither do I condemn you. Go and sin no more."

When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?

She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more. John 8:10-11 (KJV)

There is a difference between not condemning and forgiving. What Jesus says here is very interesting and maybe someday we'll take a closer look, but that isn't what this post is about. This post is about why these men brought this woman to Jesus. It was part of a long running confrontation between him and them. Jesus was a confrontationist from the beginning of his ministry and he continues to confront us today.

Let's look at Jesus beginning his earthly ministry and we will see what a confronter he is.

(If you want to see that what follows is Scriptural, you can read the New Testament account at Nitewrit's Own Harmony.  If you would like to read these events with more commentary about each, go to Nitewrit's Own Harmonized Commentary. Or just open your Bible on the table next to you.)

Let's also remember the definition of "confront": 1. to face; stand or meet face to face, 2. to face or oppose boldly, defiantly or antagonistically, 3. to bring face to face with, to confront someone with the facts or to set side by side to compare.

We discussed in the last two posts how Jesus confronted his parents. Now it is about 18 years later and he is about to start his mission in the world. He is approximately 30 years old and to the South there is a cousin baptizing people in the Jordan. This cousin named John has developed a following by this time and a certain amount of fame. Many people even wonder if this guy John is the predicted Messiah.

Jesus comes to John to be baptized and we have a confrontation between the two, granted a mild one. John argues that the roles should be reversed and Jesus should baptize him. But Jesus insists and so is baptized by John.

Immediately after his baptism, Jesus goes into the wilderness for forty days, where he has a pretty well-known confrontation with Satan. Notice this is not an argument between the two. Jesus doesn't get lured into some kind of "Who shot John?" thing. This is a confrontation of temptation with Satan offering all sorts of goodies and Jesus calmly refuting the offers by quoting Scripture, until the end, and then we see Jesus confronting Satan very boldly: "Get you hence behind me, Satan, for it is written, 'You shall worship the Lord your God, and him only shall you serve'." Luke 4:13 (KJV)

Okay, we would expect confrontations between Jesus and the Devil, I suppose and Lucifer seems to had instigated the face-to-face here. But confrontations aren't defined by who starts it and Jesus certainly didn't back away and he showed his sense of authority.

While Jesus is away in the desert, John the Baptist has his own confrontation with the priests and Levites. This wasn't the first time John has had such things. Before Jesus was Baptized he had a bit of a dust up with the Pharisees,  But when he [John] saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees come to his baptism then said he to the multitude that came forth to be baptized of him, he said unto them. “O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come?"

This time around these people begin questioning John about who he is, The Messiah, The Prophet or Elijah.

Why? Why were the Sadducees, Scribes, Pharisees, priests and Levites so interested in John?

I believe for a couple of reasons. They were looking for the promised Messiah and they were afraid of losing their positions and powers to Rome. The Jews were expecting the Messiah in those days. There had already been instances of individuals claiming to be the Christ. Some of these folk even had bands of followers and sometimes caused problems. The Jewish powers-who-be had to be concerned. The Sadducees, Herod, The Pharisees all maintained their positions at the grace of Caesar. As long as there was nothing to upset the status quo, Rome would leave them be to follow their own course. However if someone came along and led any kind of uprising, Rome would sweep down and crush it and perhaps crush all of Israel as well. Then what would they have? There were groups enough to worry about. There were Zealots, sort of terrorists if you will, and other gangs of Rebel-rousers. Certainly seeing someone like John the Baptist attracting large number of people would concern them. Still they had to be careful. What if this was the Messiah? They had to proceed with some caution. After all, their concept of Messiah was of a great warrior-king like David who would rise up an army and overthrow their oppressors, meaning Rome. They were somewhat between a rock and a hard place.

Then there comes Jesus back from the wilderness. John has told these fellows someone else greater than me is coming and now he points out Jesus to anybody nearby, saying, “Behold the Lamb of God!”

There were some unusual events on the day Jesus was Baptized. Thunder like voices in the sky, a dove descending on him and I'm sure gossip about these things had reached the ears of those powers-who-be. Jesus was not yet celebrity, but I imagine the authorities were noting him down in their book as a character of interest. He hadn't done anything to rile them yet, but I am sure somebody was saying to keep an eye on him.

Two followers of John the Baptist certainly were eyeing him. They heard John say this and they followed him. These two fellows were named John and Andrew.

Jesus confronted these two men. "What seek you?" It probably startled them and they asked where he lived. He told them to "Come and see."

Andrew brought his brother, Simon, to Jesus and Jesus immediately confronts Simon with a new name, Cephas or Peter, a stone. Note that Simon became Simon Peter even before Jesus began any ministry and well before his famous declaration of Jesus as the Son of God. 

The next day Jesus finds Philip to whom he says, "Follow me", and Philip in turn goes to Nathanael. When Jesus approaches Nathanael, he speaks first, confronting Nathanael with his knowledge of him.

Jesus and these few men now return to Galilee and their first stop is a wedding in Cana, where Jesus confronts his mother with this question, “Woman, what have I to do with thee? My hour is not yet come.”

Some time passes and now Jesus begins his ministry. He goes to the Passover in Jerusalem. What is the very first event of Jesus' earthy ministry? 

And the Jews' Passover was at hand, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem and found in the temple those that sold oxen and sheep and doves, and the changers of money sitting. And when he had made a scourge of small cords, he drove them all out of the temple, and the sheep, and the oxen; and poured out the changers' money, and overthrew the tables. And said unto them that sold doves, “Take these things hence; make not my Father's house an house of merchandise.”

Was this the Flower-Child so many paint Jesus as being? Or was this not the same sometimes angry God of the Old Testament? Jesus began his mission with a loud confrontation, a violent one, with a whip and tables crashing over; with people shouting and running and with the ones in authority watching.

Then he had a confrontation with those people in which he referred to what would occur three years or so hence. “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.” Jesus began the confrontation with the ingrained holders of the Law and religion of the time and place. He would have many such confrontations with the Sadducees and Pharisees from then on. They would dog his footsteps and the thoughts of killing him began early on.

But while here, Jesus did some preaching to the people and performed some miracles and he attracted the attention of one of these Jewish Rulers, one Nichodemus.

And he had a face-to-face confrontation with Nichodemus challenging the man's true understanding of the Scriptures that the man had spent a lifetime studying.

After the Passover, Jesus sets up camp in Judea and begins Baptizing too. This causes, if not directly,  another confrontation between the Jews and the followers of John the Baptist about Jesus' activity.

Not long after, John the Baptist is arrested. Jesus now pulls up stakes and heads into Samaria, where Jews generally would not go. Jesus has caused a ruckus in Jerusalem. He certainly made enemies by what he did. They have kept their distance. But now John has been arrested and if it has come to a point in which authorities, whether Herod or otherwise, feel comfortable doing that to John, they quite well could feel it was safe to come after this guy Jesus.  He's gained some followers, but certainly hasn't yet become as popular as John was. Samaria is not where they would think to look for a Jew.

And in Samaria he has a confrontation with a woman at a well. I mean, she being a Samaritan and he being a Jew, it is even a confrontation to even speak to her and then he challenges her religious beliefs. Read the conversation he has with her. It is full of confrontation.

After Jesus has been through Samaria, he cures a Nobleman's child in Cana. The Nobleman is from Capernaum, I suggest you keep that in mind for future reference.

Now, Jesus goes to his home town of Nazareth, walks into the Synagog and confronts those there by reading Isaiah's prophesy of the Messiah and indicates he is the fulfillment. They don't like this. They try to kill him.

People don't like being confronted with the truth and Jesus was and is a great confrontationist.

Next: Band on the Run

Illustrations:  Jesus Curses the Pharisees by James Tissot, 1886-96

                      The Purification of the Temple by Jacopo Bassano, 1570

John the Baptist's Fashion and Diet Tips

I added some additional informtion to my Harmony and am also posting it here.  This answers some questions I was asked in the comments, as well. LEM 

Perhaps we should talk about John’s appearance and diet here.  I have seen several artists’ renderings of John the Baptist and some present a character out of the Flintstones, a Neanderthal of a man in a brief costume of fur. All he needs is a thick club resting on his shoulder and he could be Ally Oop.  It others and some films, he is presented in an unruly long beard and a great bush of untamed hair as if performing a Wild man of Borneo act in the circus sideshow. Why would throngs of people come out to be baptized by such a creature? They’d more likely flee the other way thinking him possessed.

Scripture simply says he wore clothing made of camel hair and a leather belt around his waist. His clothing has been wove from camel hair didn’t necessarily have to look much different from what others wore.  Some Bible historians believe he wore a simple robe similar to and recognized as that worn by many Old Testament Prophets, for indeed, he was the last of these.

I rather imagine John was pretty clean; after all, he spent most of his day in water. His hair and beard may have been kept smoothed down by that element. Besides, nowhere in scripture does it say he was anymore hairy than anyone else. Some suppose he was a Nazirite because Gabriel had told Zechariah, “He is never to take wine or other fermented drink”.  But it is never said a razor will never touch his head. John MacArthur is one who claims he was a Nazirite, but nowhere in Scripture does it say John took such a vow. He may have had a well-trimmed beard and been bald for all we really know.

PORTION OF THE NAZIRITE VOW

1 The LORD said to Moses, 2 "Speak to the Israelites and say to them: 'If a man or woman wants to make a special vow, a vow of separation to the LORD as a Nazirite, 3 he must abstain from wine and other fermented drink and must not drink vinegar made from wine or from other fermented drink. He must not drink grape juice or eat grapes or raisins. 4 As long as he is a Nazirite, he must not eat anything that comes from the grapevine, not even the seeds or skins.

 5 " 'During the entire period of his vow of separation no razor may be used on his head. He must be holy until the period of his separation to the LORD is over; he must let the hair of his head grow long. 6 Throughout the period of his separation to the LORD he must not go near a dead body. 7 Even if his own father or mother or brother or sister dies, he must not make himself ceremonially unclean on account of them, because the symbol of his separation to God is on his head. Numbers 6:1-7

 

The other question about John concerns that Breakfast of Champions, locusts and wild honey.

We probably have no difficulty with the honey part. Honey is one of our oldest known foods, being mentioned as such as far back as 2100 BC; that’s BC, folks. Honey is “an organic, natural sugar alternative with no additives that is easy on the stomach, adapts to all cooking processes, and has an indefinite shelf-life.”

John the Baptist is living in the wilderness and is going to eat what is available and plentiful there. Grasshoppers or Locust (there is a difference, but most people wouldn’t make the distinction*** on seeing one, nor do the Gospel writers necessarily make one and translations sometimes say grasshoppers) are a common food in certain regions of the world. John probably found them delicious when sweetened by honey. The word translated as locust is “akris”.

 

Akris: a locust, particularly that species which especially infests oriental

 countries, stripping fields and trees. Numberless swarms of them almost every spring are carried by the wind from Arabia into Palestine, and having devastated that country, migrate to regions farther north, until they perish by falling into the sea. The Orientals accustomed to feed upon locusts, either raw or roasted and seasoned with salt (or prepared in other ways), and the Israelites also were permitted to eat them.

 

There are, however, some winged creatures that walk on all fours that you may eat:

 those that have jointed legs for hopping on the ground. Of these you may eat any kind of locust, katydid, cricket or grasshopper. But all other winged creatures that have four legs you are to detest. Leviticus 11:21-23

This all seems pretty clear, so why any question?

 There are some who argue the word “Akris” was really “enkris”.  This mistake seems unlikely given the number of preserved Septuagint text and all the many scholars who have translated and studied it. Surely, they would have picked up this error. Enkris means, “cake”. There was a Greek delicacy called Enkris, but John was in the desert, not it an Athens’ Starbucks having his latte and enkris.

Others argue what John was eating the fruit of the Locust Tree. This is an evergreen tree that grows as high as fifty feet and in the spring produces a huge quantity of pods called Carob. These pods are sweet inside (lot of sweet piling up here with the honey). In some parts of the East, these pods are called “St. John’s Bread” and people there believe this is what John the Baptist ate. And Carobs are dried and used as food for both cattle and people.

 But I don’t think John was out there harvesting and drying Carobs, I think he was catching and nibbling the insect, perhaps roasted with a little salt or eaten raw with a dab of honey.  There is nowhere in the Septuagint where Akris means pod or anything other than the insect. When you read the Bible, stick to the simplest exclamation. Why make this a cause for vegetarianism?

There is nothing in the statement that “his food was locust and wild honey” that precludes John eating other things. At the time of his ministry he was pretty busy and these things were handy and easy to prepare. Growing up he probably ate the traditional kosher meals of his parents and even as an adult might have had occasion to supplement his regular limited diet. And since John would have been very exact in trying to obey God in all things, he surely took part in the required Ceremonies and Feasts. And eaten the Passover lamb. So, lets focus more on his purpose and his ministry than his mealtimes.

***It is very common for people in my area to call the cicada, locust and to call actual locust, grasshoppers, since locust and grasshoppers look very similar. A cicada does not resemble either much, though.