^{page 249 note 1} Groundwork for Unity: Plain Facts about Christian Ministry (London, 1971), p. 9.

^{page 250 note 1} Rengstorf, Cf., Apostleship (Bible Key Words, London, 1952), p. 11: ‘the word ⋯π⋯στολος rarely has in classical Greek anything like the meaning which it has in the N.T.’Google ScholarMosbech, H., ‘Apostolos in the New Testament’ (Studia Theologica, 11, 1948), p. 167Google Scholar ‘there is no connection between the term of Herodotus and the ⋯π⋯στολοι of the New Testament. For this reason it is more likely that the Christian term appeared to the Greeks as something quite new.’ Kung, Hans, Die Kirche (Freiburg, 1967), p. 411Google Scholar carries the argument one stage further, denying any connection between apostleship in the New Testament and early gnosticism on the ground that there is no evidence for gnostic apostles at the time.

^{page 250 note 2} Mosbech, op. cit. p. 166; Farrer, A., ‘The Ministry in the New Testament’ (The Apostolic Ministry, ed. Kirk, K. E., London, 1946), p. 124.Google Scholar

^{page 250 note 3} Munck, J., ‘Paul, the Apostles and the Twelve’ (Studia Theologica, in, 1950), pp. 101–2.Google Scholar

^{page 250 note 4} H. Mosbech, op. cit. p. 170; Schnackenburg, , ‘Apostles before and during Paul's time’ (Apostolic History and the Gospel, ed. Gasque, and Martin, , Exeter, 1970), p. 294.Google Scholar

^{page 250 note 5} Knox, J., ‘The Ministry in the Primitive Church’ (The Ministry in Historical Perspective, ed. Niebuhr, Williams, , New York, 1956), p. 7, ‘the very term suggests what all our data confirm, that the apostle was an itinerant evangelist’.Google Scholar

^{page 250 note 6} H. Kung, op. cit. p. 410, ‘von seiner Grundbedeutung “Abgesandter” her wird es verschieden verwendet’.

^{page 250 note 7} Barrett, C.K., ‘Paul and the Pillar Apostles’ (Studia Paulina, Haarlem, 1953), p. 19Google Scholar ‘the apostle is a unique link between the end of the old world and the beginning of the new’; Moody, D., ‘Charismatic and Official Ministries’, Interpretation, XIX (1965), 171;Google ScholarFridrichsen, A., The Apostle and his Message (Uppsala, 1947), p. 3.Google Scholar

^{page 250 note 8} E. E. Ellis, ‘Role of the Christian Prophet in Acts’ (Apostolic History, ed. Gasque and Martin), pp. 64–5.

^{page 250 note 9} Op. cit. pp. 26–7.

^{page 250 note 10} ibid. pp. 12–13; 21 ff.

^{page 250 note 11} ibid. p. 19.

^{page 250 note 12} ibid. pp. 38–41.

^{page 250 note 13} Apostle and Bishop: A Study of the Gospel, the Ministry and the Church-community‘ (London, 1963), p. 53.

^{page 251 note 1} Hebert, op. cit. p. 57; G. Dix, ‘The Ministry in the Early Church’ (The Apostolic Ministry), p. 228: Karrer, O., Peter and the Church (New York, 1963), pp. 75–6.Google Scholar

^{page 251 note 2} Geldenhys, ‘Supreme Authority’ (London, 1953), pp. 48 ff. Others who hold to the shaliaḥ hypothesis either as it stands in Rengstorf or in a slightly modified form are Schnackenburg, The Church in the New Testament (New York, 1965), pp. 24, 31; Cerfaux, L., The Church in the Theology of Paul (New York, 1959), p. 248;Google ScholarLeenhardt, , ‘Les Fonctions constitutives de IÉglise et I' Episcopé selon le Nouveau Testament’, Rév. d' Hist. et de Phil. Rel. XLVII (1967), 119, 130–1;Google Scholar H. Kung, op. cit. pp. 413–17; Ellis, E. E., ‘Paul and his Co-workers’, N.T.S. XVII. 4 (1971), 445 n. 2;Google Scholar C. W. Dugmore, ‘The Organisation and Worship of the Primitive Church’ (Companion to the Bible, ed. H. H. Rowley), pp. 544–5. R. P. C. Hanson, op. cit. p. 13, is hesitant, ‘it may be that one or two of the examples of this use correspond to the well-known Jewish institution of the shaliaḥ, the commissioner representing another for a specific task and a temporary purpose’. Meanwhile Rengstorf, ‘The Election of Matthias’ (Current Issues in M.T. Interpretation, ed. Snyder and Klassen, New York, 1962), p. 183 continues to reaffirm his original thesis.

^{page 251 note 3} Among these are Mosbech, op. cit. p. 168, ‘somewhere or other a mere accidental circumstance has induced the rendering of by ⋯π⋯στολος’ (italics mine); Munck, op. cit. p. 100; Rigaux, ‘Los Doce Apostoles’, Concilium, xxxiv (1968), 9; W. D. Davies, ‘Church Life in the New Testament’ (Christian Origins and Judaism), pp. 209 ff.; R.R. Williams, ‘The Authority of the Ministry’ (Authority in the Apostolic Age), p. 46; Schmithals, W., Das kirchliche Apostelamt (Göttingen, 1961), pp. 87 ff.;Google ScholarKlein, G., Die zuölf Apostel: Ursprung und Gehalt einer Idee (Göttingen, 1961), pp. 22 ff.Google Scholar (Klein elaborates an extensive critical study of other views on the shaliaḥ hypothesis from Rengstorf till the time he wrote); Ashcraft, ‘Paul's Understanding of Apostleship’, Review and Expositor, LV, 4 (1958), 40a; Lampe, G. W. H., ‘The Early Church and the Ministry’, The Modern Churchman, XLI (Sept. 1951), 38;Google ScholarTaylor, V., ‘The Church and the New Testament’ Exp. T. LXII (1950–1), 270.Google Scholar

^{page 251 note 4} Manson, T. W., The Church's Ministry (London, 1948), pp. 35 ff.Google Scholar with a summary on page 43.

^{page 251 note 5} ibid. pp. 46–7, ‘On the formal side the relation between Jesus and the twelve corresponds admirably to the relation between a principal and his sheluhim in Jewish usage. What is distinctive of the shaliaḥ of Jesus is not the form of his commission but its content.’

^{page 252 note 1} op. cit. p. 26.

^{page 252 note 2} ‘As the Jews had no missionaries in our sense of the word…they did not employ the vocable of missionaries but of envoys with other aims’, Mosbech, op. cit. p. 169.

^{page 252 note 3} J. Munck, op. cit. p. 109, although he does admit a pre-Pauline usage, thinks that Paul's concept as a specially appointed missionary to the Gentiles is the classic concept which finally triumphs. Cf. also Barrett, C. K., The Signs of an Apostle (London, 1970), pp. 76–81.Google Scholar

^{page 252 note 4} G. Klein, op. cit. pp. 112 ff.; von Campenhausen, H., ‘Der urkirchliche Apostelbegriff’, Studia Theologica, 11 (1948), 166 ff.Google Scholar

^{page 252 note 5} For the concept of the college of twelve cf. Menoud, P. H., ‘Les Additions au groupe des douze apôtres, d'après le livre des Actes’, Rev. d' Hist. et de Phil. Rel. XXXVII (1957), 78 ff.;Google Scholar J. Munck, op. cit. p. 108. For possible parallels with the Qumran literature cf. Johnson, S. E., ‘Dead Sea Manual of Discipline and the Jerusalem Church of Acts’ (Scrolls and the Mew Testament, ed. Stendahl, K., New York, 1957), pp. 129 ff.;Google Scholar Bo Reicke, ‘The Constitution of the Primitive Church in the Light of Jewish Documents’, ibid. pp. 143 ff.; Fitzmyer, J. A., ‘Jewish Christianity in Acts in Light of the Qumran Scrolls’ (Studies in Luke-Acts, ed. Keck, L. E. and Martyn, J. L., London, 1968), pp. 246 ff.Google Scholar

^{page 253 note 1} Mosbech, op. cit. pp. 188–9; Rigaux, op. cit. p. 7; Schnackenburg Apostles, p. 294; Farrer, A., Les Ministères aux Origines de l'Eglise (Paris, 1971), p. 85.Google Scholar

^{page 253 note 2} Munck, op. cit. p. 106.

^{page 253 note 3} Munck, , Paul and the Salvation of Mankind (London, 1959), pp. 177 ff.Google Scholar

^{page 253 note 4} For support of this view cf. Mosbech, op. cit. pp. 197–8; Schnackenburg, ‘Apostles’, pp. 296 ff.; A. T. Hanson, The Pioneer Ministry, pp. 94 ff.; Cambier, J., ‘Le Critère Paulinien de I'Apostolat en II Cor. 12: 6s.’, Bib. XLIII (1962), 483 ff.; Lemaire, op. cit. pp. 90 ff.Google Scholar

^{page 253 note 5} For this reason there is no a priori reason for rejecting the prima facie development of the term from a more restricted to a more open sense. It is curious in this sense that H. Kung, although he accepts the originality of the use of the word ‘Apostle’ as applied to the Twelve in the Gospels (Die Kirche, pp. 415–16), nevertheless feels it more likely that the word developed during the period of the New Testament from a wider to a narrower sense.

^{page 253 note 6} Cf. Schrackenburg, Apostles, p. 294.

^{page 254 note 1} ‘Abgesandter’, H. Kung, op. cit. p. 410; ‘itinerant evangelist’, Knox, op.cit. p.7. ‘a delegate with the duty of preaching the gospel’, Mosbech, op. cit. p. 170; ‘emissary of the Church’, Schnackenburg, op. cit. p. 294; ‘prophets on circuit in contrast to prophets in session’, Selwyn, E. C., The Christian Prophets (London, 1900, quoted in Ellis, op. cit. p. 64).Google Scholar

^{page 254 note 2} Cf. p. 250 n. 7.

^{page 254 note 3} E.g. p. 308, ‘the emissaries of the Gentile churches who went with him (Paul) were to take their gifts to the poor of the holy city and thereby fulfil the prophets' promises of the last days’.

^{page 255 note 1} Mosbech, op. cit. p. 170; Davies, op. cit. p. 241; Kung, op. cit. p. 412; A. T. Hanson, op. cit. p. 11; Ehrhardt, The Apostolic Ministry, p. 5; Schlink, , ‘La Succession Apostolique’, Verbum Caro, xviii (1964). 73;Google Scholar V. Taylor, op. cit. p. 271.

^{page 255 note 2} Schnackenburg, ‘Apostles’, p. 288.

^{page 255 note 3} Mosbech, op. cit. pp. 171–3; Cerfaux, op. cit. p. 249 n. 41; Lemaire, op. cit. p. 74; Schlink, op. cit. p. 73; Menoud, op. cit. p. 71.

^{page 256 note 1} Mosbech, op. cit. p. 189.

^{page 256 note 2} Mosbech, ibid. p. 171; Geldenhys, op. cit. pp. 67, 80; Trocmè, E., La formation de I' Evangile de Marc (Paris, 1963), pp. 151–2Google Scholar who also adds preaching and teaching. This latter was ‘un coup de clairon destiné a bouleverser I'ordre ètabli’.

^{page 256 note 3} Cambier, op. cit. pp. 485 ff.

^{page 256 note 4} Cambier, op. cit. p. 487; Vanstone, ‘The Ministry in the New Testament’ (The Historic Episcopate, ed. K. Carey), pp. 30–1.

^{page 256 note 5} Williams, op. cit. p. 48.

^{page 256 note 6} Käsemann, ‘Ministry and Community in the New Testament’ (Essays on N.T. Themes), pp. 78, 81.

^{page 256 note 7} Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians (London, 1968), p. 341.

^{page 256 note 8} The change to ἓνδɛκα in D*, F, G, it, vg and syr. is too easily explicable to be genuine.

^{page 257 note 1} ‘C'est que ce terme “Les Douze” était devenu un nom collégial’, Allo, E.-B., Première Epitre aux Corinthiens (Paris, 1956), p. 392.Google Scholar At least in this aspect of the history of the post-resurrection church there is no conflict between Paul and Luke.

^{page 257 note 2} Cf. Allo, op. cit. pp. 392–3.

^{page 257 note 3} Cf. p. 255 n. I.

^{page 258 note 1} Quoted by J.-L. Leuba, L' Institution et I' Evinement (Neuchatel, 1950), p. 49. Leuba himself disagrees with this judgement.

^{page 258 note 2} Rigaux, op. cit. p. 14; Schnackenburg, The Church in the New Testament, p. 31; Karrer, op. cit. pp. 9 ff.; Leenhardt, op. cit. p. 119; Kung, op. cit. pp. 413–14; Geldenhys, op. cit. p. 46; Rengstorf, op. cit. pp. 29, 3a, 38–9.

^{page 258 note 3} New Testament Theology, i, The Proclamation of Jesus (London, 1971), p. 234. In the light of Jeremias' argument about the inclusion of Judas in the Twelve as well as many other supporting facts it would seem that historical scepticism at this point can only be based on a priori assumptions. Cf. also Schmid, J., El Evangelio según S. Marcos (Barcelona, 1967), p. 114.Google Scholar

^{page 258 note 4} Paul, the Apostles and the 12, pp. 102–3.

^{page 258 note 5} Cf. in this respect the rather extreme views of G. Klein, op. cit. pp. 202 ff.

^{page 258 note 6} Perhaps it is mainly for this reason that the debate about ‘apostolic succession’ has become fossilized in two opposite extremes. The ‘institutionalists’ believe that the ‘charismatics’ are not taking seriously the origin of the concept of apostle with the historical Jesus, and the ‘charismatics’ believe that the ‘institutionalists’ are reading back a later development into a period too early in the history of the primitive church.

^{page 259 note 1} Therefore, methodologically, there does not seem to be any good reason to start with Paul's concept of apostle and work forwards (or backwards) except a predisposition to find the origin of most other NT theological concepts in an early reaction to Paul's excessive hellenizing of the Gospel.

^{page 260 note 1} Paul and the Salvation of Mankind, pp. 212–13.

^{page 260 note 2} What else can the phrase ɛἰς ⋯ποστολήν in Gal. ii. 8 mean but that, because of the commission to take the gospel to the circumcised and uncircumcised (note the parallelism between vv. 7 and 8), Paul and Barnabas were apostles of equal standing with the rest? This again concords with Luke's account of the history of early Christianity when, quite naturally, he can refer to Paul and Barnabas as apostles (Acts xiv. 4, 14).

^{page 262 note 1} Elsewhere he includes Timothy and Silas with him as apostles (I Thess. ii. 6). Those who would distinguish between Paul on the one hand and his co-workers on the other, rejecting the natural sense of this verse (e.g. Lemaire, op. cit. p. 74; Geldenhys, op. cit. p. 70; Knox, J., ‘Rom. 15: 14 and Paul's Conception of his Apostolic Ministry’, J.B.L. LXXXIII (1964), 6)Google Scholar do so on the same rigid schematized view of apostleship that we have already seen to be untenable.

^{page 263 note 1} Paul's dispute with the ‘superlative apostles’ was not a theoretical one — Is their calling correct (i.e. ecclesiastically approved)? — but a practical one — What gospel were they preaching and what influence were they exerting? Goppelt, Cf. L., Die apostotische und nachapostolische Zeit (Göttingen, 1962), pp. 122–3;Google ScholarBarrett, C. K., ‘Paul's Opponents in II Corinthians’, N.T.S. xvii (1970–1), 233 ff.Google Scholar

^{page 263 note 2} C. K. Barrett, The Signs of an Apostle, implicitly makes such a fundamental discrepancy the pivot point of his discussion of the New Testament evidence. Unfortunately it is a stance which is assumed and not proved. It springs from at least two questionable methodological procedures: (i) Paul is the only valid starting point to unravel the concept of apostle in the New Testament (cf. p. 35); (ii) Luke has a distinctive theology which is wholly represented in Acts (pp. 47 ff.). But is it really possible to compare on an equal footing an allegedly historical writing, dependent upon Other sources, with a highly personalized series of letters?

^{page 263 note 3} Cf. for example K. H. Rengstorf, The Election of Matthias, pp. 185–9; P. H. Menoud, op. cit. p. 78.

^{page 264 note 1} For an extended development of this theme cf. Fuller, D., Easter Faith and History (London, 1968), pp. 181–261.Google Scholar