Twelve Ordinary Men, Week 3

Apostles

In these four listings found in the New Testament, all will list very similarly into three groups of four. As we look at these groups, the first set Peter, Andrew, James, and John were the ones closest to Christ and Peter is always at the head of the list. Group two always has Philip at the top and includes Bartholomew, Matthew, and Thomas. Group three is always led by James the son of Alphaeus, and it includes Simon the Zealot; Judas son of James (called “Thaddeaus” in Mark and “Lebbaeus, whose surname was Thaddeaus” in Matthew); and finally, Judas Iscariot. (Judas Iscariot is omitted from the list in Acts 1 because he was already dead by then. In the three lists where Judas’s name is included, it always appears last, along with a remark identifying him as the traitor.)

The three names at the head of each group seem to have been the group leaders. The three groups always appear in the same order: first Peter’s group, then the group led by Philip, then the group headed by James.

The groups appear to be listed in descending order based on their level of intimacy with Christ. The members of group one were in all likelihood the first disciples Jesus called to Himself (John 1:35–42). Therefore they had been with Him the longest and occupied the most trusted position in His inner circle. They are often seen together in the presence of Christ at key times. Of the four in the first group, three—Peter, James, and John—form an even closer inner circle. Those three are with Jesus at major events in His ministry when the other apostles are either not present or not as close. The three in the inner circle were together, for example, on the Mount of Transfiguration and in the heart of the Garden of Gethsemane (cf. Matthew 17:1; Mark 5:37; 13:3; 14:33).

Group two does not have such a high profile, but they are still significant figures in the Gospel accounts. Group three is more distant, and they are rarely mentioned in the narrative accounts of Jesus’ ministry. The only member of group three we know much about is Judas Iscariot—and we know him only because of his treachery at the very end. So although there were twelve apostles, only three seem to have had the most intimate relationship with Christ. The others seemed to enjoy somewhat lesser degrees of personal familiarity with Him.

This suggests that even a relatively small group of twelve is too large for one person to maintain the closest intimacy with each group member. Jesus kept three men very close to Him—Peter, James, and John. Next came Andrew, and then the others, obviously in declining degrees of close friendship. If Christ in His perfect humanity could not pour equal amounts of time and energy into everyone He drew around Him, no leader should expect to be able to do that.

The Twelve were an amazingly varied group. Their personalities and interests swept the spectrum. The four in group one seem to be the only ones tied together by common denominators. They were all four fishermen, they were two sets of brothers, they came from the same community, and they had apparently all been friends for a long time. By contrast, Matthew was a tax collector and a loner. Simon was a Zealot—a political activist—and a different kind of loner. The others all came from unknown occupations.

They all had vastly differing personalities. Peter was eager, aggressive, bold, and outspoken—with a habit of revving his mouth while his brain was in neutral. I have often referred to him as the apostle with the foot-shaped mouth. John, on the other hand, spoke very little. In the first twelve chapters of Acts, he and Peter are constant companions, but no words of John are ever recorded. Bartholomew (also known sometimes as Nathanael), was a true believer, openly confessing his faith in Christ and quick to have faith (cf. John 1:47–50). Significantly, he is in the same group as (and sometimes paired with) Thomas, who was an outspoken skeptic and doubter and wanted to have proof for everything.

Their political backgrounds were different, too. Matthew, the former tax collector (who was sometimes called Levi), was considered one of the most despicable people in Israel before Jesus called him. He had taken a job with the Roman government to extort taxes from his own people—and that tax money went to pay for the Roman occupation army. The lesser-known of the two Simons, on the other hand, is called “the Zealot” in Luke 6:15 and Acts 1:13. Zealots were an outlaw political party who took their hatred of Rome to an extreme and conspired to overthrow Roman rule. Many of them were violent outlaws. Since they did not have an army, they used sabotage and assassination to advance their political agenda. They were, in effect, terrorists. One faction of the Zealots was known as sicarii (literally, “dagger-men”) because of the small, curved blades they carried. They concealed those weapons beneath their robes and used them to dispatch people they perceived as political enemies—people like tax collectors. Roman soldiers were also favorite targets for their assassinations. The sicarii usually staged these acts of execution at public functions in order to heighten fear. That Matthew, a former tax collector, and Simon, a former Zealot, could be part of the same company of twelve apostles is a testimony to the life-changing power and grace of Christ.

It is interesting that the key men in the first and second groups of apostles were originally called at the very outset of Christ’s ministry. John 1:35–42 describes how Jesus called John and Andrew. They, in turn, on that very same day, brought Peter, who was Andrew’s brother. James, the remaining member of that group, was John’s brother, so it was undoubtedly Andrew and John who brought him to Christ, too. In other words, the first group’s association with Jesus went back to the very start of His public ministry.

John 1:43–51 likewise describes the calling of Philip and Nathanael (also known as Bartholomew). They were called “the following day” (v. 43). So that group also had a history that went back to the beginning of Jesus’ ministry. These were men who had known Jesus well and followed Him closely for a long time.

The first person in the first group—the man who became the spokesman and the overall leader of the group—was “Simon, whom He also named Peter” (Luke 6:14).

Simon was a very common name. There are at least seven Simons in the Gospel accounts alone. Among the Twelve were two named Simon (Simon Peter and Simon the Zealot). In Matthew 13:55, Jesus’ half brothers are listed, and one of them was also named Simon. Judas Iscariot’s father was called Simon as well (John 6:71). Matthew 26:6 mentions that Jesus had a meal at the home of a man in Bethany named Simon the leper. Another Simon—a Pharisee—hosted Jesus at a similar meal (Luke 7:36–40). And the man conscripted to carry Jesus’ cross partway to Calvary was Simon the Cyrene (Matthew 27:32).

Our Simon’s full name at birth was Simon Bar-Jonah (Matthew 16:17), meaning “Simon, son of Jonah” (John 21:15–17). Simon Peter’s father’s name, then, was John (sometimes rendered Jonas or Jonah). We know nothing more about his parents.

But notice that the Lord gave him another name. Luke introduces him this way: “Simon, whom He also named Peter” (Luke 6:14). Luke’s choice of words here is important. Jesus didn’t merely give him a new name to replace the old one. He “also” named him Peter. This disciple was known sometimes as Simon, sometimes as Peter, and sometimes as Simon Peter.

“Peter” was a sort of nickname. It means “Rock.” (Petros is the Greek word for “a piece of rock, a stone.”) The Aramaic equivalent was Cephas (cf. 1 Corinthians 1:12; 3:22; 9:5; 15:5; Galatians 2:9). John 1:42 describes Jesus’ first face-to-face meeting with Simon Peter: “Now when Jesus looked at him, He said, ‘You are Simon the son of Jonah. You shall be called Cephas’ (which is translated, A Stone).” Those were apparently the first words Jesus ever said to Peter. And from then on, “Rock” was his nickname.

Sometimes, however, the Lord continued to refer to him as Simon anyway. When you see that in Scripture, it is often a signal that Peter has done something that needs rebuke or correction.

The nickname was significant, and the Lord had a specific reason for choosing it. By nature Simon was brash, vacillating, and undependable. He tended to make great promises he couldn’t follow through with. He was one of those people who appears to lunge wholeheartedly into something but then bails out before finishing. He was usually the first one in; and too often, he was the first one out. When Jesus met him, he fit James’s description of a double-minded man, unstable in all his ways (James 1:8). Jesus changed Simon’s name, it appears, because He wanted the nickname to be a perpetual reminder to him about who he should be. And from that point on, whatever Jesus called him sent him a subtle message. If He called him Simon, He was signaling him that he was acting like his old self. If He called him Rock, He was commending him for acting the way he ought to be acting.

This young man named Simon, who would become Peter, was impetuous, impulsive, and overeager. He needed to become like a rock, so that is what Jesus named him. From then on, the Lord could gently chide or commend him just by using one name or the other.

After Christ’s first encounter with Simon Peter, we find two distinct contexts in which the name Simon is regularly applied to him. One is a secular context. When Scripture refers to his house, for example, it’s usually “Simon’s house” (Mark 1:29; Luke 4:38; Acts 10:17). When it speaks of his mother-in-law, it does so in similar terms: “Simon’s wife’s mother” (Mark 1:30; Luke 4:38). Luke 5, describing the fishing business, mentions “one of the boats, which was Simon’s” (v. 3)—and Luke says James and John were “partners with Simon” (v. 10). All of those expressions refer to Simon by his given name in purely secular contexts. When he is called Simon in such a context, the use of his old name usually has nothing to do with his spirituality or his character. That is just the normal way of signifying what pertained to him as a natural man—his work, his home, or his family life. These are called “Simon’s” things.

The second category of references where he is called Simon is seen whenever Peter was displaying the characteristics of his unregenerate self—when he was sinning in word, attitude, or action. Whenever he begins to act like his old self, Jesus and the Gospel writers revert to calling him Simon. In Luke 5:5, for example, Luke writes, “Simon answered and said to Him, ‘Master, we have toiled all night and caught nothing; nevertheless at Your word I will let down the net.’ ” That is young Simon the fisherman speaking. He is skeptical and reluctant. But as he obeys and his eyes are opened to who Jesus really is, Luke begins to refer to him by his new name. Verse 8 says, “When Simon Peter saw it, he fell down at Jesus’ knees, saying, ‘Depart from me, for I am a sinful man, O Lord!’ ”

We see Jesus calling him Simon in reference to the key failures in his career. In Luke 22:31, foretelling Peter’s betrayal, Jesus said, “Simon, Simon! Indeed, Satan has asked for you, that he may sift you as wheat.” Later, in the Garden of Gethsemane, when Peter should have been watching and praying with Christ, he fell asleep. Mark writes, “[Jesus] came and found them sleeping, and said to Peter, ‘Simon, are you sleeping? Could you not watch one hour? Watch and pray, lest you enter into temptation. The spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak’ ” (Mark 14:37–38). Thus usually when Peter needed rebuke or admonishment, Jesus referred to him as Simon. It must have reached the point where whenever the Lord said “Simon,” Peter cringed. He must have been thinking, Please call me Rock! And the Lord might have replied, “I’ll call you Rock when you act like a rock.”

It is obvious from the Gospel narratives that the apostle John knew Peter very, very well. They were lifelong friends, business associates, and neighbors. Interestingly, in the Gospel of John, John refers to his friend fifteen times as “Simon Peter.” Apparently John couldn’t make up his mind which name to use, because he saw both sides of Peter constantly. So he simply put both names together. In fact, “Simon Peter” is what Peter calls himself in the address of his second epistle: “Simon Peter, a bondservant and apostle of Jesus Christ” (2 Peter 1:1). In effect, he took Jesus’ nickname for him and made it his surname (cf. Acts 10:32).

After the resurrection, Jesus instructed His disciples to return to Galilee, where He planned to appear to them (Matthew 28:7). Impatient Simon apparently got tired of waiting, so he announced that he was going back to fishing (John 21:3). As usual, the other disciples dutifully followed their leader. They got into the boat, fished all night, and caught nothing.

But Jesus met them on the shore the following morning, where He had prepared breakfast for them. The main purpose of the breakfast meeting seemed to be the restoration of Peter (who, of course, had sinned egregiously by denying Christ with curses on the night the Lord was betrayed). Three times Jesus addressed him as Simon and asked, “Simon, son of Jonah, do you love Me?” (John 21:15–17). Three times, Peter affirmed his love.

That was the last time Jesus ever had to call him Simon. A few weeks later, on Pentecost, Peter and the rest of the apostles were filled with the Holy Spirit. It was Peter, the Rock, who stood up and preached that day.

Peter was exactly like most Christians—both carnal and spiritual. He succumbed to the habits of the flesh sometimes; he functioned in the Spirit other times. He was sinful sometimes, but other times he acted the way a righteous man ought to act. This vacillating man—sometimes Simon, sometimes Peter—was the leader of the Twelve.

MacArthur, John F., Jr. 2002. Twelve Ordinary Men: How the Master Shaped His Disciples for Greatness, and What He Wants to Do with You. Nashville, TN: W Pub. Group.