Apollonia – Apostle

Apollonia

ap-o-lo'-ni-a (Apollonia): A town in Mygdonia, a district in Macedonia. It was situated a little to the south of Lake Bolbe, on the Via Egnatia, the great Roman road leading from the coast of the Adriatic to the river Hebrus (Maritza), one of the main military and commercial highways of the empire: it lay between Amphipolis and Thessalonica, a day's journey (Livy xlv.28) or about 30 Roman miles from the former and 38 from the latter. The foundation of the town may perhaps be attributed to about 432 BC; in any case, coins are extant which attest its existence in the 4th century BC (Head, Historia Numorum, 181). Paul and Silas passed through the town on their journey from Philippi to Thessalonica, but do not appear to have stayed there (Acts 17:1). The name seems to have survived in the modern Pollina (Leake, Northern Greece, III, 458; Cousinery, Voyage dans la Macedoine, I, 115).

Marcus N. Tod

Apollonius

ap-o-lo'-ni-us (Apollonios): A common name among the Syro-Macedonians. Prideaux (Connexion) interrupts his narrative of the year 148 BC to give an account of the different persons who bore this name

(1) Son of Thrasaeus (2 Macc 3:5) who was governor of Coele-Syria (Palestine and Phoenicia) under Seleucus Philopator, when Heliodorus came to Jerusalem to rob the temple, and afterward, by his authority in that province, supported Simon the governor of the temple at Jerusalem against Onias the high priest. He was also chief minister of state to King Seleucus. But on the accession of Antiochus Epiphanes, Apollonius, in some way becoming obnoxious to the new king, left Syria and retired to Miletus.

(2) A son of (1) who, while his father resided at Miletus, was brought up at Rome along with Demetrius, son of Seleucus Philopator, and at that time held as a hostage by the Romans. This Apollonius lived in great intimacy with Demetrius, who, on recovering the crown of Syria, made him governor of Coele-Syria and Phoenicia, the same government which his father held under Seleucus Philopator. He seems to have been continued in the same government by Alexander (1 Macc 10:69) but he revolted from him to embrace the interest of Demetrius.

(3) Son of Menestheus, and favorite and chief minister of Antiochus Epiphanes (2 Macc 4:21). He went as ambassador from Antiochus, first to Rome (Livy xlii.6) and afterward to Ptolemy Philometor, king of Egypt (2 Macc 4:21). This is generally held to be the same who is said to have been over the tribute (1 Macc 1:29; 2 Macc 5:24) and who, on the return of Antiochus from his last expedition into Egypt, was sent with a detachment of 22,000 men to destroy Jerusalem. He attacked the Jews while keeping the Sabbath day holy and slew great multitudes of them (2 Macc 5:24-27).

(4) Governor of Samaria in the time of Antiochus Epiphanes. He was slain in battle by Judas Maccabeus (1 Macc 3:10,11; Ant, XII, vii, 10). (5) Son of Gennaeus (2 Macc 12:2); as governor of a toparchy in Palestine under Antiochus Eupator he proved a bitter enemy of the Jews.

J. Hutchison

Apollophanes

ap-o-lof'-a-nez, a-pol-o-fa'-nez (Apollophanes): A Syrian killed by Judas Maccabeus (2 Macc 10:37).

Apollos

a-pol'-os (Apollos, the short form of Apollonius): Apollos was a Jew of Alexandrian race (Acts 18:24) who reached Ephesus in the summer of 54 AD, while Paul was on his third missionary journey, and there he "spake and taught accurately the things concerning Jesus" (Acts 18:25). That he was eminently fitted for the task is indicated by the fact of his being a "learned man," "mighty in the scriptures," "fervent in spirit," "instructed in the way of the Lord" (Acts 18:24,Acts 18:25). His teaching was however incomplete in that he knew "only the baptism of John" (Acts 18:25), and this has given rise to some controversy. According to Blass, his information was derived from a written gospel which reached Alexandria, but it was more probably the fruits of what Apollos had heard, either directly or from others, of the preaching of John the Baptist at Bethany beyond Jordan (compare John 1:28). Upon receiving further instruction from Priscilla and Aquila (Acts 18:26), Apollos extended his mission to Achaia, being encouraged thereto by the brethren of Ephesus (Acts 18:27).

In Achaia "he helped them much that had believed through grace; for he powerfully confuted the Jews, and that publicly, showing by the scriptures that Jesus was the Christ" (Acts 18:27,Acts 18:28). During Apollos' absences in Achaia, Paul had reached Ephesus and learned of what had been taught by Apollos there. (Acts 19:1). Since Paul was informed that the Ephesians still knew nothing of the baptism of the Spirit (Acts 19:2–4), it is probable that Apollos had not imparted to his hearers the further instruction he had received from Priscilla and Aquila, but had departed for Achaia shortly after receiving it. Paul remained upward of two years among the Ephesians (Acts 19:8,Acts 19:10), and in the spring of 57 AD he wrote the First Epistle to the Corinthians. By this time Apollos was once more in Ephesus (compare 1 Corinthians 16:12). It is incredible that this epistle of Paul could have been prompted by any feelings of jealousy or animosity on his part against Apollos. It was rather the outcome of discussion between the two regarding the critical situation then existing in Corinth.

The mission of Apollos had met with a certain success, but the breeding of faction, which that very success, through the slight discrepancies in his teaching (compare 1 Corinthians 1:12; 1 Corinthians 3:4) with that of Paul or of Cephas, had engendered, was utterly alien to his intentions. The party spirit was as distasteful to Apollos as it was to Paul, and made him reluctant to return to the scene of his former labors even at the desire of Paul himself (1 Corinthians 16:12). The epistle voiced the indignation of both. Paul welcomed the cooperation of Apollos (1 Corinthians 3:6: "I planted, Apollos watered"). It was not against his fellow-evangelist that he fulminated, but against the petty spirit of those who loved faction more than truth, who saw not that both he and Apollos came among them as "God's fellow-workers" (1 Corinthians 3:9), the common servants of the one Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

This view is also borne out by the tenor of Clement's Epistle to the Corinthians (compare Hennecke, Neutestamentliche Apokryphen, 84-112, especially 105): nor does it conflict with the passages 1 Corinthians 12:1–7; 2 Corinthians 3:1; 2 Corinthians 11:16, where Paul seems to allude to Apollos' eloquence, wisdom, and letter of commendation. Paul wrote thus not in order to disparage Apollos but to affirm that, even without these incidental advantages, he would yield to none in the preaching of Christ crucified.

The last mention of Apollos is in the Epistle to Titus, where he is recommended along with Zenas to Titus (Titus 3:13). He was then on a journey through Crete (Titus 3:15), and was probably the bearer of the epistle. The time of this is uncertain, as the writing of the Epistle to Titus, though generally admitted to have been after the release of Paul from imprisonment at Rome, has been variously placed at 64-67 AD. See TITUS, EPISTLE TO.

C. M. Kerr

Apollyon

a-pol'-i-on (Apolluon; 'abhaddon, "destroyer"): Present participle of the verb apolluo, "to destroy."

I. Definition.

A proper name, original with the author of the Apocalypse and used by him once (Revelation 9:11) as a translation of the Hebrew word "Abaddon" (see ABADDON) to designate an angel or prince of the lower world.

II. Old Testament Background.

1. Fundamental Meaning:

The term Abaddon ("destruction") appears solely in the Wisdom literature of the Old Testament and in the following narrow range of instances: Job 26:6; Job 28:22; Job 31:12; Psalms 88:11; Proverbs 15:11. In all these passages save one (Job 31:12) the word is combined either with Sheol, "death," or "the grave," in such a way as to indicate a purely eschatological term based upon the advanced idea of moral distinctions in the realm of the dead. In the one exceptional passage (Esther 8:6 is incorrectly referred to--the word here is different, namely, 'abhedhan) where the combination does not occur, the emphasis upon the moral element in the "destruction" mentioned is so definite as practically to preclude the possibility of interpreting the term in any general sense (as Charles, HDB, article "Abaddon"; per con., Briggs, ICC, "Psalms" in the place cited.; BDB, sub loc.). The meaning of the word, therefore, is: the place or condition of utter ruin reserved for the wicked in the realm of the dead.

2. Personification:

One other feature of Old Testament usage is worthy of consideration as throwing light upon Revelation 9:11. Abaddon and the accompanying terms "Death" and Sheol are personified (as in Job 28:22) and represented as living beings who speak and act (compare Revelation 6:8).

III. New Testament Usage.

1. The Starting-Point:

The starting-point of the Apocalyptist's use of "Apollyon" is to be found in the fundamental meaning of "Abaddon" as moral destruction in the underworld, together with the occasional personification of kindred terms in the Old Testament. The imagery was in general terms familiar while the New Testament writer felt perfectly free to vary the usage to suit his own particular purposes.

2. Apollyon not Satan but Part of an Ideal Description:

(1) Since Apollyon is a personification he is not to be identified with Satan (compare Revelation 9:1 where Satan seems to be clearly indicated) or with any other being to whom historical existence and definite characteristics are ascribed. He is the central figure in an ideal picture of evil forces represented as originating in the world of lost spirits and allowed to operate destructively in human life. They are pictured as locusts, but on an enlarged scale and with the addition of many features inconsistent with the strict application of the figure (see Revelation 9:7–10). The intention is, by the multiplication of images which the author does not attempt to harmonize, to convey the impression of great power and far-reaching destructiveness.

(2) This interpretation finds additional support in the writer's significant departure from the familiar usage. In the Old Testament the place of destruction is personified--in Revelation 9:11, personal forces issue from the Abyss, of which the presiding genius is Destruction in person. The seer's picture is equally independent of the tradition represented by the Talmud (Shab f. 55) where Abaddon is personified as jointly with Death president over six destroying angels. These modifications are evidently due to the exigencies of the pictorial form. It is clearly impossible to portray forces proceeding from the place of ruin in the charge of the place itself.

3. Apollyon Necessary to the Picture:

The importance of the conception of Apollyon to the completeness of the picture should not be overlooked. It is intended to represent these forces as having a certain principle of internal unity and as possessors of the power of effective leadership.

4. General Significance of the Description:

As to the specific significance of the vision of the locusts as a whole it is not easy to reach a conclusion. Professor Swete suggests (Commentary on Apocalypse in the place cited.) that "the locusts of the abyss may be the memories of the past brought home at times of divine visitation; they hurt by recalling forgotten sins." It seems to us more probable that it represents an actual historical movement, past or to come, demoniacal in origin and character, human in the mode of its operation and the sphere of its influence, used by God for a scourge upon mankind and kept in restraint by His grace and power. See ABADDON.

Louis Matthew Sweet

Apostasy; Apostate

a-pos'-ta-si, a-pos'-tat (he apostasia, "a standing away from"): I.e. a falling away, a withdrawal, a defection. Not found in the English Versions of the Bible, but used twice in the New Testament, in the Greek original, to express abandonment of the faith. Paul was falsely accused of teaching the Jews apostasy from Moses (Acts 21:21); he predicted the great apostasy from Christianity, foretold by Jesus (Matthew 24:10–12) which would precede "the day of the Lord" (2 Thessalonians 2:2). Apostasy, not in name but in fact, meets scathing rebuke in the Epistle of Jude, e.g. the apostasy of angels (Jude 1:6). Foretold, with warnings, as sure to abound in the latter days (1 Timothy 4:1–3; 2 Thessalonians 2:3; 2 Peter 3:17). Causes of: persecution (Matthew 24:9,Matthew 24:10); false teachers (Matthew 24:11); temptation (Luke 8:13); worldliness (2 Timothy 4:4); defective knowledge of Christ (1 John 2:19); moral lapse (Hebrews 6:4–6); forsaking worship and spiritual living (Hebrews 10:25–31); unbelief (Hebrews 3:12). Biblical examples: Saul (1 Samuel 15:11); Amaziah (2 Chronicles 25:14,2 Chronicles 25:27); many disciples (John 6:66); Hymeneus and Alexander (1 Timothy 1:19,1 Timothy 1:20); Demas (2 Timothy 4:10). For further illustration see Deuteronomy 13:13; Ze 1:4-6; Galatians 5:4; 2 Peter 2:20,2 Peter 2:21.

"Forsaking Yahweh" was the characteristic and oft-recurring sin of the chosen people, especially in their contact with idolatrous nations. It constituted their supreme national peril. The tendency appeared in their earliest history, as abundantly seen in the warnings and prohibitions of the laws of Moses (Exodus 20:3,Exodus 20:4,Exodus 20:23; Deuteronomy 6:14; Deuteronomy 11:16). The fearful consequences of religious and moral apostasy appear in the curses pronounced against this sin, on Mount Ebal, by the representatives of six of the tribes of Israel, elected by Moses (Deuteronomy 27:13–26; Deuteronomy 28:15–68). So wayward was the heart of Israel, even in the years immediately following the national emancipation, in the wilderness, that Joshua found it necessary to re-pledge the entire nation to a new fidelity to Yahweh and to their original covenant before they were permitted to enter the Promised Land (Joshua 24:1–28). Infidelity to this covenant blighted the nation's prospects and growth during the time of the Judges (Judges 2:11–15; Revelation 10:6,Revelation 10:10,Revelation 11:2; 1 Samuel 12:10). It was the cause of prolific and ever-increasing evil, civic and moral, from Solomon's day to the Assyrian and Babylonian captivities. Many of the kings of the divided kingdom apostatized, leading the people, as in the case of Rehoboam, into the grossest forms of idolatry and immorality (1 Kings 14:22–24; 2 Chronicles 12:1). Conspicuous examples of such royal apostasy are Jeroboam (1 Kings 12:28–32); Ahab (1 Kings 16:30–33); Ahaziah (1 Kings 22:51–53); Jehoram (2 Chronicles 21:6,2 Chronicles 21:10,2 Chronicles 21:12–15); Ahaz (2 Chronicles 28:1–4); Manasseh (2 Chronicles 33:1–9); Amen (2 Chronicles 33:22). See IDOLATRY.

Prophecy originated as a Divine and imperative protest against this historic tendency to defection from the religion of Yahweh. In classical Greek, apostasy signified revolt from a military commander. In the roman catholic church it denotes abandonment of religious orders; renunciation of ecclesiastical authority; defection from the faith. The persecutions of the early Christian centuries forced many to deny Christian discipleship and to signify their apostasy by offering incense to a heathen deity or blaspheming the name of Christ. The emperor Julian, who probably never vitally embraced the Christian faith, is known in history as "the Apostate," having renounced Christianity for paganism soon after his accession to the throne. An apostate's defection from the faith may be intellectual, as in the case of Ernst Haeckel, who, because of his materialistic philosophy, publicly and formally renounced Christianity and the church; or it may be moral and spiritual, as with Judas, who for filthy lucre's sake basely betrayed his Lord. See exhaustive articles on "Apostasy" in the Jewish Encyclopedia.

Dwight M. Pratt

Apostle

a-pos'-l ([ @apostolos], literally, "one sent forth," an envoy, missionary): For the meaning of this name as it meets us in the New Testament, reference is sometimes made to classical and Jewish parallels. In earlier classical Greek there was a distinction between an aggelos or messenger and an apostolos, who was not a mere messenger, but a delegate or representative of the person who sent him. In the later Judaism, again, apostoloi were envoys sent out by the patriarchate in Jerusalem to collect the sacred tribute from the Jews of the Dispersion. It seems unlikely, however, that either of these uses bears upon the Christian origin of a term which, in any case, came to have its own distinctive Christian meaning. To understand the word as we find it in the New Testament it is not necessary to go beyond the New Testament itself. To discover the source of its Christian use it is sufficient to refer to its immediate and natural signification. The term used by Jesus, it must be remembered, would be Aramaic, not Greek, and apostolos would be its literal equivalent.

1. The Twelve:

In the New Testament history we first hear of the term as applied by Jesus to the Twelve in connection with that evangelical mission among the villages on which He dispatched them at an early stage of His public ministry (Matthew 10:1 Mark 3:14; Mark 6:30; Luke 6:13; Luke 9:1 ff). From a comparison of the Synoptics it would seem that the name as thus used was not a general designation for the Twelve, but had reference only to this particular mission, which was typical and prophetic, however, of the wider mission that was to come (compare Hort, Christian Ecclesia, 23-29). Luke, it is true, uses the word as a title for the Twelve apart from reference to the mission among the villages. But the explanation probably is, as Dr. Hort suggests, that since the Third Gospel and the Book of Ac formed two sections of what was really one work, the author in the Gospel employs the term in that wider sense which it came to have after the Ascension.

When we pass to Acts, "apostles" has become an ordinary name for the Eleven (Acts 1:2,Acts 1:26), and after the election of Matthias in place of Judas, for the Twelve (2:37,42,43, etc.). But even so it does not denote a particular and restricted office, but rather that function of a world-wide missionary service to which the Twelve were especially called. In His last charge, just before He ascended, Jesus had commissioned them to go forth into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature (Matthew 28:19,Matthew 28:20; Mark 16:15). He had said that they were to be His witnesses not only in Jerusalem and Judea, but in Samaria (contrast Matthew 10:5), and unto the uttermost part of the earth (Acts 1:8). They were apostles, therefore, qua missionaries--not merely because they were the Twelve, but because they were now sent forth by their Lord on a universal mission for the propagation of the gospel.

2. Paul:

The very fact that the name "apostle" means what it does would point to the impossibility of confining it within the limits of the Twelve. (The "twelve apostles" of Revelation 21:14 is evidently symbolic; compare in 7:3 ff the restriction of God's sealed servants to the twelve tribes.) Yet there might be a tendency at first to do so, and to restrict it as a badge of honor and privilege peculiar to that inner circle (compare Acts 1:25). If any such tendency existed, Paul effectually broke it down by vindicating for himself the right to the name. His claim appears in his assumption of the apostolic title in the opening words of most of his epistles. And when his right to it was challenged, he defended that right with passion, and especially on these grounds: that he had seen Jesus, and so was qualified to bear witness to His resurrection (1 Corinthians 9:1; compare Acts 22:6 ff); that he had received a call to the work of an apostle (Romans 1:1; 1 Corinthians 1:1, etc.; Galatians 2:7; compare Acts 13:2 Acts 22:21); but, above all, that he could point to the signs and seals of his apostleship furnished by his missionary labors and their fruits (1 Corinthians 9:2; 2 Corinthians 12:12; Galatians 2:8). It was by this last ground of appeal that Paul convinced the original apostles of the justice of his claim. He had not been a disciple of Jesus in the days of His flesh; his claim to have seen the risen Lord and from Him to have received a personal commission was not one that could be proved to others; but there could be no possibility of doubt as to the seals of his apostleship. It was abundantly clear that "he that wrought for Peter unto the apostleship of the circumcision wrought for (Paul) also unto the Gentiles" (Galatians 2:8). And so perceiving the grace that was given unto him, Peter and John, together with James of Jerusalem, recognized Paul as apostle to the Gentiles and gave him the right hand of fellowship (Galatians 2:9).

3. The Wider Circle:

It is sometimes said by those who recognize that there were other apostles besides the Twelve and Paul that the latter (to whom some, on the ground of 1 Corinthians 15:7; Galatians 1:19, would add James the Lord's brother) were the apostles par excellence, while the other apostles mentioned in the New Testament were apostles in some inferior sense. It is hardly possible, however, to make out such a distinction on the ground of New Testament usage. There were great differences, no doubt, among the apostles of the primitive church, as there were among the Twelve themselves--differences due to natural talents, to personal acquirements and experience, to spiritual gifts. Paul was greater than Barnabas or Silvanus, just as Peter and John were greater than Thaddaeus or Simon the Cananean.

But Thaddaeus and Simon were disciples of Jesus in the very same sense as Peter and John; and the Twelve and Paul were not more truly apostles than others who are mentioned in the New Testament. If apostleship denotes missionary service, and if its reality, as Paul suggests, is to be measured by its seals, it would be difficult to maintain that Matthias was an apostle par excellence, while Barnabas was not. Paul sets Barnabas as an apostle side by side with himself (1 Corinthians 9:5 Galatians 2:9; compare Acts 13:2 Acts 14:4,Acts 14:14); he speaks of Andronicus and Junias as "of note among the apostles" (Romans 16:7); he appears to include Apollos along with himself among the apostles who are made a spectacle unto the world and to angels and to men (1 Corinthians 4:6,1 Corinthians 4:9); the natural inference from a comparison of 1 Thessalonians 1:1 with 2:6 is that he describes Silvanus and Timothy as "apostles of Christ"; to the Philippians he mentions Epaphroditus as "your apostle" (Philippians 2:25 the Revised Version, margin), and to the Corinthians commends certain unknown brethren as "the apostles of the churches" and "the glory of Christ" (2 Corinthians 8:23 the Revised Version, margin). And the very fact that he found it necessary to denounce certain persons as "false apostles, deceitful workers, fashioning themselves into apostles of Christ" (2 Corinthians 11:13) shows that there was no thought in the primitive church of restricting the apostleship to a body of 12 or 13 men. "Had the number been definitely restricted, the claims of these interlopers would have been self-condemned" (Lightfoot, Galatians, 97).

4. Apostles in Didache:

When we come to the Didache, which probably lies beyond the boundary-line of New Testament history, we find the name "apostles" applied to a whole class of nameless missionaries--men who settled in no church, but moved about from place to place as messengers of the gospel (chapter 11). This makes it difficult to accept the view, urged by Lightfoot (op. cit., 98) and Gwatkin (HDB, I, 126) on the ground Of Luke 24:48; Acts 1:8,Acts 1:22; 1 Corinthians 9:1, that to have seen the Lord was always the primary qualification of an apostle--a view on the strength of which they reject the apostleship of Apollos and Timothy, as being late converts to Christianity who lived far from the scenes of our Lord's ministry. Gwatkin remarks that we have no reason to suppose that this condition was ever waived unless we throw forward the Didache into the 2nd century. But it seems very unlikely that even toward the end of the 1st century there would be a whole class of men, not only still alive, but still braving in the exercise of their missionary functions all the hardships of a wandering and homeless existence (compare Didache 11:4-6), who were yet able to bear the personal testimony of eye-witnesses to the ministry and resurrection of Jesus. In Luke 24:48 and Acts 18:22 it is the chosen company of the Twelve who are in view. In 1 Corinthians 9:1 Paul is meeting his Judaizing opponents on their own ground, and answering their insistence upon personal intercourse with Jesus by a claim to have seen the Lord. But apart from these passages there is no evidence that the apostles of the early church were necessarily men who had known Jesus in the flesh or had been witnesses of His resurrection--much less that this was the primary qualification on which their apostleship was made to rest.

5. The Apostleship:

We are led then to the conclusion that the true differentia of the New Testament apostleship lay in the missionary calling implied in the name, and that all whose lives were devoted to this vocation, and who could prove by the issues of their labors that God's Spirit was working through them for the conversion of Jew or Gentile, were regarded and described as apostles. The apostolate was not a limited circle of officials holding a well-defined position of authority in the church, but a large class of men who discharged one--and that the highest--of the functions of the prophetic ministry (1 Corinthians 12:28; Ephesians 4:11). It was on the foundation of the apostles and prophets that the Christian church was built, with Jesus Christ Himself as the chief corner-stone (Ephesians 2:20). The distinction between the two classes was that while the prophet was God's spokesman to the believing church (1 Corinthians 14:4,1 Corinthians 14:22,1 Corinthians 14:25,1 Corinthians 14:30,1 Corinthians 14:31), the apostle was His envoy to the unbelieving world (Galatians 2:7,Galatians 2:9).

The call of the apostle to his task might come in a variety of ways. The Twelve were called personally by Jesus to an apostolic task at the commencement of His earthly ministry (Matthew 10:1 ff parallel), and after His resurrection this call was repeated, made permanent, and given a universal scope (Matthew 28:19,Matthew 28:20; Acts 1:8). Matthias was called first by the voice of the general body of the brethren and thereafter by the decision of the lot (Acts 1:15,Acts 1:23,Acts 1:26). Paul's call came to him in a heavenly vision (Acts 26:17–19); and though this call was subsequently ratified by the church at Antioch, which sent him forth at the bidding of the Holy Ghost (Acts 13:1 ff), he firmly maintained that he was an apostle not from men neither through man, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father who raised Him from the dead (Galatians 1:1). Barnabas was sent forth (exapostello is the verb used) by the church at Jerusalem (Acts 11:22) and later, along with Paul, by the church at Antioch (Acts 13:1); and soon after this we find the two men described as apostles (Acts 14:4). It was the mission on which they were sent that explains the title. And when this particular mission was completed and they returned to Antioch to rehearse before the assembled church "all things that God had done with them, and that he had opened a door of faith unto the Gentiles" (Acts 14:27), they thereby justified their claim to be the apostles not only of the church, but of the Holy Spirit.

The authority of the apostolate was of a spiritual, ethical and personal kind. It was not official, and in the nature of the case could not be transmitted to others. Paul claimed for himself complete independence of the opinion of the whole body of the earlier apostles (Galatians 2:6,Galatians 2:11), and in seeking to influence his own converts endeavored by manifestation of the truth to commend himself to every man's conscience in the sight of God (2 Corinthians 4:2). There is no sign that the apostles collectively exercised a separate and autocratic authority. When the question of the observance of the Mosaic ritual by GentileChristians arose at Antioch and was referred to Jerusalem, it was "the apostles and elders" who met to discuss it (Acts 15:2,Acts 15:6,Acts 15:22), and the letter returned to Antioch was written in the name of "the apostles and the elders, brethren" (Acts 15:23).

In founding a church Paul naturally appointed the first local officials (Acts 14:23), but he does not seem to have interfered with the ordinary administration of affairs in the churches he had planted. In those cases in which he was appealed to or was compelled by some grave scandal to interpose, he rested an authoritative command on some express word of the Lord (1 Corinthians 7:10), and when he had no such word to rest on, was careful to distinguish his own judgment and counsel from a Divine commandment (1 Corinthians 12:25,1 Corinthians 12:30). His appeals in the latter case are grounded upon fundamental principles of morality common to heathen and Christian alike (1 Corinthians 5:1), or are addressed to the spiritual judgment (1 Corinthians 10:15), or are reinforced by the weight of a personal influence gained by unselfish service and by the fact that he was the spiritual father of his converts as having begotten them in Christ Jesus through the gospel (1 Corinthians 4:15 f). It may be added here that the expressly missionary character of the apostleship seems to debar James, the Lord's brother, from any claim to the title. James was a prophet and teacher, but not an apostle. As the head of the church at Jerusalem, he exercised a ministry of a purely local nature. The passages on which it has been sought to establish his right to be included in the apostolate do not furnish any satisfactory evidence. In 1 Corinthians 15:7 James is contrasted with "all the apostles" rather than included in their number (compare 1 Corinthians 9:5). And in Galatians 1:19 the meaning may quite well be that with the exception of Peter, none of the apostles was seen by Paul in Jerusalem, but only James the Lord's brother (compare the Revised Version, margin).

LITERATURE.

Lightfoot, Galatians, 92-101; Hort, Christian Ecclesia, Lect II; Weizsacker, The Apostolic Age, II, 291-99; Lindsay, The Church and the Ministry, 73-90.

J. C. Lambert