life as he had taught them to apprehend it. They immediately felt the pressure of this responsibility. From being disciples (that is, "learners "), which was all they could be so long as he was with them, they assumed the function to which from the beginning he had destined them, and the name which by anticipation he had given them (Luke vi, 13). Henceforth they were apostles, that is, men "sent forth," namely, as representatives or ambassadors, with authority to represent to the world One who had proved himself Messiah, King of men.

The Apos

tolic

College

Their first step after the ascension of Christ was to make good their original number, twelve, which had been broken into by the defection of Judas. This they did by choosing to fill his place a man named Matthias, taking care that he should be duly qualified for the responsible distinction. The simple qualification that they sought is worthy of note. It was that he should be one of the men" that have companied with us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and went out among us, beginning from the baptism of John, unto the day that he was received up from us. Of these must one become a witness with us of his resurrection" (Acts i, 21, 22). They made the choice not wholly in reliance on their own wisdom, but, selecting two candidates, cast lots between them, leaving the decision by prayer to their ascended Lord (Acts i, 23-26).

This primitive organization — a college of twelve apostles - appears to have been merely provisional, having in view the object of proclaiming facts with which they had become familiar the facts of a life and death which had had such a wonderful outcome of resurrection. The number twelve was maintained partly because it was the Lord's chosen number, but also as they were Jews - with reference to the twelve tribes of Israel, now scattered abroad through the world (cf. Matt. xix, 28; James i, 1). Of the subsequent history of most of these twelve little or nothing is known. Only

Peter and John are mentioned for their activity in Jerusalem, and James the brother of John for his martyrdom, which occurred under Herod Agrippa (Acts xii, 2). These three were just the ones of the twelve who had been most intimate with Jesus, and to their care was left the initiation of the gospel announcement.

As time went on, however, and the needs of manning their mission increased, the apostolic company seems to have been open to new additions. James the brother of Jesus, who had not been a disciple during the Lord's lifetime, became the head of the Jerusalem church, and is spoken of as an apostle (Gal. i, 19); and Paul, a converted Pharisee, became the most active and able of the apostles. The later requisite for apostleship seems to have been that the man should have seen the risen Lord (cf. 1 Cor. ix, 1), and this was true both of James and Paul (for James, see I Cor. xv, 7). It is not unlikely, indeed, that the company of more than five hundred (1 Cor. xv, 6) who saw him acquired a distinction akin to apostolic because they could vouch for the fact that he had risen.

I

Their Fitting Kind of Work. The apostles who after their Lord's departure were charged with the first promulgation of the truth were men in the ordinary walks of life, rather than aristocrats or scholars; in touch, therefore, with the mind and needs of common people, and thus in genuine sympathy with all, from the humblest up. For the work that first needed doing telling a straight story of facts—such men were the best instruments. On the one hand, they had not become sophisticated with the refinements or prejudices of academic learning. They had no inherited system of theology or ecclesiastical organization to maintain. On the other hand, they had been intimate companions of Jesus, learning his way from the beginning; and this in itself was

a liberal education. As for book learning, they had, like all earnest-minded Jews, a sound working knowledge of the Old Testament, such as their life-long conversance with synagogue instruction would impart; which knowledge had of course been greatly enriched and clarified by their intercourse with the great Teacher.

NOTES. 1. The Apostles' Conversance with Scripture. Peter's intimate knowledge of Scripture may be seen from the fact that in his first discourse, in which he announces to the disciples the need of a new election to the apostolate (Acts i, 20), he quotes from Psa. lxix and cix; and in his great Pentecost discourse (Acts ii, 14–36) he quotes from Joel ii, 28 ff.; from Psa. xvi, 8 ff.; and from Psa. cx, 1. Peter and John in their thanksgiving (Acts iv, 25, 26) quote two verses of Psa. ii. Peter in his second great discourse (Acts iii, 12-26) quotes several passages from Genesis and Deuteronomy. Stephen's great discourse (Acts vii) is a masterly résumé of Hebrew history from Abraham to Solomon, with extended quotations from Amos v and Isa. lxvi (Acts vii, 42, 43, 49, 50).

2. Bearing on Accuracy of Factual Report. As to the fitness of these primitive apostles for reporting the words of Jesus, as these are later given in the gospels, A. C. Benson (" From a College Window,” p. 346) says : "The words and sayings of Christ emerge from the narrative, though in places it seems as though they had been imperfectly apprehended, as containing and expressing thoughts quite outside the range of the minds that recorded them; and thus possess an authenticity which is confirmed and proved by the immature mental grasp of those who compiled the records, in a way in which it could not have been proved if the compilers had been obviously men of mental acuteness and far-reaching philosophical grasp."

Accordingly, both their native endowments and their acquired ability were at once perceived by the educated class who saw their efficiency. The same leaders who a few months before had inquired about Jesus, "How knoweth this man letters, having never learned?" (John vii, 15) are the ones of whom it is now said, "When they saw the boldness of Peter and John, and had perceived that they were unlearned (agrammatoi) and ignorant (idiotai) men, they marvelled; and they took knowledge of them, that they had

been with Jesus" (Acts iv, 13). The source of their remarkable assurance and power was evident. They were fitted in their degree, as the Master had been before them, to speak with authority and not as the scribes (cf. Matt. vii, 29).

Their Sense

Limits

It will be noted, however, that they did not attempt to do anything for which their birth and training had not fitted them. They were plain men of the people, Galiof Scope and leans, who had lived remote from centers of learning, but in contact with everyday affairs. They did not set up as professional teachers or philosophers; did not pose as prophets or sages; did not attempt to demolish the prevailing moral and religious order of their day. They felt themselves rather in charge of a tremendous fact, of which their own experience was cognizant fact which a plain man could tell as well as a learned one; fact which could not remain inert, but opened out into vital meanings, fulfilling and clarifying the great hopes which their nation had cherished. The benefits of this fact they felt themselves authorized and obligated, as apostles of a living Lord and King, to make available to all who would accept it.

Such a work produced its own fitting style of utterance. Not argument, not exposition, not elaborate description and narration. The tone and effect of their initial message was essentially preaching; that is, announcement, proclamation, of what they had seen and heard, without theory, or elaboration, or speculation. In later years it was thus put by an Evangelist whose sense of it was peculiarly penetrative: That which we have heard, that which we have seen with our eyes, that which we beheld, and our hands handled, concerning the Word of life, . . . that which we have seen and heard declare we unto you also, that ye also may have fellowship with us" (1 John i, 1, 3). They did not know the full secret of it at first; but they could state a visible and audible fact. For such a work men of this sterling class, and with their unique preparation of experience, were

eminently qualified. Their lack of academic refinements and prepossessions was, indeed, an advantage. There was so much less to warp or obscure their vision, so much less blur on the mirror of their consciousness.

II

Four Phases of the First Apostolic Message. The main substance of these plain men's preaching may be given in four statements, which to them had the force of simple matter of fact.

1. It begins with the culminating event of Jesus' earthly life his resurrection from the dead. Their Master, who had so cruelly suffered death,, was alive again; they had seen him and had received his commission. This is proclaimed as an actual and literal occurrence, a proved fact of human life. Their sense of its importance is seen in their choosing to repair their number one who, like them, could serve as a witness of his resurrection (Acts i, 22). They could vouch for the truth that, as Peter expressed it, it was not possible that Jesus should be holden of death (Acts ii, 24). This is the central announcement in all their preaching, this, rather than the details of his works and words before resurrection. It was an event full of cheer and hope to those who had cast in their lot with him in earthly life—an event full of untold meaning for men.

Along with this announcement, which naturally would bring dismay on those who had mistakenly put him to death, the apostles assured their nation that this error was not laid up against them (Acts iii, 17-20), but that all might avail themselves of his pardon and favor. Thus, to begin with, the apostles regarded themselves as witnesses to an event which in every sense and to every man was good news, an evangel, a gospel.

2. Nor was it merely of a past event that the apostles were witnesses and interpreters. They were eager also to