Second Sunday after Trinity, Year A: exegesis on the Gospel, Matthew 9:35-10:23 — part 3

My exegesis on the Gospel for the Second Sunday after Trinity, Year A, Matthew 9:35-10:23 continues.

Part 1 has the full reading and exposition for Matthew 9:35-9:38. Part 2 discusses Matthew 10:1-2, especially the Apostles Peter and Andrew, who were brothers as well as James and John, the sons of Zebedee.

Today’s post is about those Apostles named in Matthew 10:3:

10:3 Philip and Bartholomew; Thomas and Matthew the tax collector; James son of Alphaeus, and Thaddaeus;

In 2015, I wrote an exegesis based on Matthew Henry’s commentary for Matthew 10: parts 1 and 2, which may also be of interest.

Commentary comes from Matthew Henry and John MacArthur (as specified below).

Matthew includes himself with Philip, Bartholomew and Thomas (verse 3).

Matthew Henry’s commentary points out that Gospel accounts differ in the Apostles’ grouping from greater to less (emphases mine):

Matthew, the penman of this gospel, is here joined with Thomas (v. 3), but in two things there is a variation from the accounts of Mark and Luke, Mark 3 18; Luke 6 15. There, Matthew is put first; in that order it appears he was ordained before Thomas; but here, in his own catalogue, Thomas is put first. Note, It well becomes the disciples of Christ in honour to prefer one another. There, he is only called Matthew, here Matthew the publican, the toll-gatherer or collector of the customs, who was called from that infamous employment to be an apostle. Note, It is good for those who are advanced to honour with Christ, to look unto the rock whence they were hewn; often to remember what they were before Christ called them, that thereby they may be kept humble, and divine grace may be the more glorified. Matthew the apostle was Matthew the publican.

John MacArthur tells us more about these men, whom Christ called to serve Him to the utmost, beginning with Philip:

Now, let’s go on and look at group two …

… let’s look, first of all, at Philip.  This is not to be confused with Philip, the deacon in Acts 6 who later became an evangelist, this is Philip the disciple.  His name is a Greek name.  Now, all 12 were Jews so he must have had a Jewish name, but we don’t know his Jewish name.  For some reason he goes always by his Greek name.  And by the way, his Greek name means lover of horses.  We don’t know whether his parents were big on that and so they just gave him that Greek name or what.  But he’s always gone by the name of Philip.  We don’t know his Jewish name, which is kind of interesting because when the Greeks later on want to see Jesus, they go to Philip so he kind of became the Greek connection.  He was the place where you sort of plugged in from the Greek level, and maybe they felt comfortable because his name was the Greek name.  He is always in the second list and he is always at the head of the second list, which means that he seems to have been the sort of the leader of the second group.  It’s hard to imagine that, because he doesn’t really have those kinds of gifts, but he may have led more than they followed, we’re not sure. 

Philip would have known Peter and Andrew already:

Now, for a while he was a fellow townsman at Bethsaida, and you remember that Bethsaida up in Galilee was the town where Peter and Andrew came from, so Philip knew Peter and Andrew.  He had perhaps grown up knowing them, perhaps was a close friend of theirs.  Since they were all God-fearing Jews, Peter, Andrew, Philip and Nathanael or Bartholomew, we’ll get to him later, they probably all knew each other.  They were close friends.  And there is in the 12 the very obvious fact that there’s a lot of friendship interwoven there.  There was some one-by-one callings of these individuals, one to another, to another, to another.  And so, Philip was kind of in the group.

He may well have been a fisherman.  He appears later on with Andrew, and with Peter, and with James, and with John, in John 21 fishing.  The three gospels say nothing about him, just his name, nothing else.  But John’s gospel mentions him four times.  And we really get to know him in these four passages.  Let’s look together at John 1:43, and let’s meet Philip.  And let’s ask the question again, “What kind of people can God use?”

Philip will come off as anything but a stained glass saint.  Verse 43: “The day following,” and that means the day following Peter and Andrew having an encounter with Christ, the day following the time when John the Baptist pointed to Christ and said, “Behold, the Lamb of God,” and Peter and Andrew followed Him.  “The day following that Jesus would go forth into Galilee and findeth Philip and saith unto him, ‘Follow Me.’” Now, that is the first direct call of a disciple.  Peter and Andrew had already met Christ but they had sort of found Him, they had sort of come along.  But Philip is the first individual to whom the Lord expressly said, “Follow Me.”  He walked up and found him and said “Follow Me.” 

But may I hasten to add that Philip also had a seeking heart.  God doesn’t find people against their will.  He had a seeking heart.  And if you look at verse 45, after verse 44 where it says he was from Bethsaida where Andrew and Peter lived, it says Philip then went to find Nathanael, or Bartholomew same person, and said to him, “We have found Him.”  Now, from the Lord’s viewpoint, He found Philip; from Philip’s viewpoint, he found the Lord.  And isn’t that the way your testimony goes?  The sovereign side is that God found you; the human side is that you found Christ.  And in order for it to happen both of you had to be seeking.  “The Son of Man has come into the world to seek and save that which is lost, if you seek with Me with all your heart you shall surely,” what?  “Find Me.”  It is God seeking, it is man seeking.  God seeks that true heart that seeks Him.  And so, Philip was seeking the truth.  Philip was seeking that reality.  In verse 45 he says, “We found Him of whom Moses in the law and the prophets did write.”  In other words, he must have been studying the law and the prophets, he must have been exposing himself to that, and now he says we found Him, and His name is Jesus, He comes from Nazareth and He is Jesus bar Joseph, the son of Joseph.  We found Him.

But in a real sense there was no human agency, Jesus just came right up and said, “Follow Me.”  There was no human voice directed to him.  Philip’s eyes and ears were open, his heart was open.  And when he heard the divine voice say, “Follow Me,” he ran to tell Nathanael that he had found Him.  That the Messiah was here.  And you can imagine the excitement and the thrill and the joy and the ecstasy.  In fact, he even wanted to bring Nathaniel, at the end of verse 46, he says, “Come and see.  Come and see.  Find out for yourself.”

Now, what do we learn about Philip?  First thing we learn about him is he was seeking the Messiah.  He was a God-fearing Jew.  He was religious and he was truly religious.  He had an honest heart.  We also learn that his response when being found was to find somebody else.  And I’m convinced that the greatest source for evangelism is friendship.  I think friendship provides the most fertile soil for evangelism.  Don’t you?  Because there’s already a relationship of love.  And into that relationship of love you can introduce the reality of Christ.  Invariably, and I say this through years of experience, invariably when somebody becomes a Christian, their first reaction in the warmth and the joy of that new found life is to find a friend and tell that person what has happened.  And by the way, if you’ve lost that, then that’s only a sad commentary on one of two things: one, you don’t have any unchristian friends; or two, you don’t care anymore.  Both are tragic.  But Philip immediately went to Nathaniel.  The immediate response to salvation is evangelism: find somebody else and tell them the good news.

However, Philip was, like the other Apostles, far from perfect. His pragmatism sometimes got in the way:

Jesus has already made wine at the marriage feast at Cana so He has demonstrated His supernatural power.  That for sure has happened, and there may have been other miracles and mighty deeds that he had seen.  But we come to [John] chapter 6 and a big crowd has gathered at the north end of the Sea of Galilee, and Jesus has been teaching them all day and healing them all day of all their diseases.  And it’s been a tremendous day but it’s coming to the evening now and the crowd is hungry and there were 5,000 men, which means there were probably at least 5,000 women and 20,000 kids.  So, it’s a big crowd.  And they’re all there and you go to chapter 6 verse 5: “When Jesus then lifted up His eyes, saw a great company come to Him, He said to Philip,” and here we meet Philip again.  “Where shall we buy bread that these may eat?”  Philip, how are we going to get bread?  Why did He single Philip out?  You know what I believe?  I believe Philip was in charge of the food.  Somebody had to be in charge of the food.  We know Judas was in charge of the what?  The money.  And somebody had to be in charge of the food.  Figure out how much they needed and how to get it and buy it and have it, because they had to eat as they travelled around and ministered …

Hmmm, why did He ask him that?  Verse 6, “He said this to test him, for He Himself knew what He would do.”  He knew He was going to feed them miraculously and create in His own hand bread and fish but He was testing Philip.  Now Philip, you’ve seen Me make wine at the marriage supper, now we don’t have any food for this multitude, how are we going to get some food?  You know what he said?  Verse 7: “Philip answered Him, ‘Two hundred denariis’ worth of bread is not sufficient for them that every one of them may take a little.’” He gives Him an instant answer which, you know what that proves?  That’s another thing that proves to me that he was in charge of the food: he had already analyzed it.  He had it figured out.  He calculated that they could pull an offering out of that bunch of about 200 pennyworth, or else that’s how much they had in the kitty.  And by the way, one of those denarii or one of those pennies is one day’s wages.  So, they could get about 200 days’ wages out, and let’s assume that they bought barley biscuits.  You could get 36 barley biscuits for one denarii and each biscuit was the size of your hand and an inch and a half thick.  It’s like a big French roll, kind of.  And he had calculated the whole deal ...  It cannot be done.

You know what you learn about Philip?  It never entered into his mind that the Lord was supernatural.  It utterly eluded him that Christ could do a creative miracle.  The supernatural resources of Jesus Christ totally escaped his thinking.  He just calculated the whole deal.  You know what he is?  He is analytical.  He is pragmatic.  I’m sure he would sit in a board meeting today with one of those little things, and just punch it.  Can’t do it.  We don’t have the money.  It cannot be done.  He had too much arithmetic to be adventurous.  He was so stuck on facts and figures he missed faith all together …

He was a facts and figures guy, always going by what appeared on the human level.

Now, let’s see if he has any improvement in six chapters.  Go to chapter 12 verse 20: “There were certain Greeks who had come down to Jerusalem for the feast.”  They were God-fearing Greeks, come for the Passover, and they had come because they had been devotees of Judaism, and they heard about Christ.  “And they came to Philip,” because he was the Greek connection, he had a Greek name probably that’s the reason they came to him.  “And they desired him saying, ‘Sir, we would see Jesus.’” Well, Philip may have been approachable, he may have been a warm-hearted fellow, but he didn’t take them to Jesus.  He said, in effect, “Now, you guys wait here, I don’t know if this is kosher, I don’t know if this can happen.  I’ve got to go check.”  So, he goes and tells Andrew.  And together they go to Jesus.  You know what we learn about Philip?  He was not decisive.  He was not forceful.  Peter would have grabbed those Gentiles and dragged them into the presence of Jesus and said, “Lord, look at these guys, they want to see you.”  But not Philip … He was still living in chapter 10 of Matthew, at the way at the beginning when the Lord had said, “I am come but for the lost sheep of the house of,” what?  “Of Israel.”  So, he’s saying, “These are Gentiles.  You know, it’s not in the minutes to bring the Gentiles.  I don’t think the constitution allows it.  The bylaws, you know.  The Lord said He has not come for the lost but for the lost sheep.”  You see, he had no sense of the bigger vision.  He didn’t get the message of grace … I mean, he said we’ve found the Messiah but beyond that he didn’t really have a clue of what was going on. 

Well, finally we see him in chapter 14 and it isn’t better; it’s worse, if you can believe this.  Three years later, verse 8, Philip says to Jesus, here they are the night before His, this is the Passover, this is the communion, you know, this is the time He’s unfolding His heart to His disciples.  He’s going to be arrested, and crucified, and so forth right after this.  It’s all coming to an end, and Philip says to Him, “Lord, show us the Father and that will be sufficient.”  Jesus said to him, “How long do I have to be with you before you know Me, Philip?”  Boy, this guy is really a klutz.  I mean, his spiritual vision is nil.  Everything is superficial with him.  “He that hath seen Me hath seen the Father.”  And how can you possibly be saying three years later, “Show us the Father.”  “Believest thou not that I am in the Father and the Father in Me.”  Don’t you believe that, Philip?  “And the words that I speak unto you I speak not of Myself but the Father that dwells in Me, He doeth the works.  Believe Me, I am in the Father and the Father in Me or else believe Me for the very works’ sake.”  I mean, My words and My works, haven’t they told you something, Philip?  Oh, what puny faith, what a dull character.  Show us the Father.  He is the leader of the ignorant and slow of heart.  Three years Philip gazed into the only face of God men ever saw, and he still didn’t know who it was.  He’s not Phi Beta Kappa.

However, his view after receiving the Holy Spirit at the first Pentecost changed Philip, who died a martyr:

You know what tradition tells us about this dear fellow?  He got his act together, and he wound up dying as a martyr for a Christ he wouldn’t deny.  And he said he only had one request, and that is that when he was dead they not wrap his body in linen like his Lord because he wasn’t worthy of that.  Aren’t you glad God uses the slow, and the faithless, and the analytical skeptics?  Because some of us find ourselves there, don’t we?

Next we come to Bartholomew, also known as Nathanael:

His first name was Nathanael.  Bartholomew, by the way, means bartholomaios, son of Tolmai.  Nathanael, son of Tolmai, two names, his first and his last.  Nathanael means gift of God, son of Tolmai.  And he was so different than his friend Philip.  He was full of faith, and he was so contemplative, and so meditative, and so in awe of the supernatural.  And he perceived everything as clear as crystal from the very beginning. 

By the way, among the Hebrews there was a sect known as the Tolmaians who gave great attention to the Scripture and it may well be that Nathanael was somehow connected to them, though that may be a remote possibility.

He came from Cana of Galilee, again from a little village in Galilee.  He was brought to Jesus by Philip, so he was acquainted with the rest of the gang.  And only one passage in the Bible tells us about him and it’s John 1.  Let’s go back.  Verse 43.  I think you’re going to find him fascinating.  It says in verse 43 that “Jesus went forth to Galilee and found Philip and told Philip to follow Him.”  And verse 45 then says: “Philip finds Nathanael, or Bartholomew, and said to him, ‘We have found Him, of whom Moses and the law and the prophets did write, and His name is Jesus of Nazareth and He is bar Joseph, the son of Joseph.’” Now, what does this tell us?  Well, it implies that Nathanael was a searcher of Scripture and a seeker after divine truth.  It tells us that Nathanael would have known Messianic prophecy and studied it because the way that Philip approaches him is, “Here’s the One the Scripture told us about.”  The implication being that Nathanael was a student of Scripture.  A further implication, I believe, being that Philip and Nathanael had probably spent hours and hours and hours studying together the Old Testament as they together were looking for the Messiah.  We found Him, the One that Moses wrote about.

So, the first thing we learn about Nathanael is that he was a studier of the Scripture, a searcher for truth, a seeker for God.  And that’s the good part about him, like it was about Philip.  He wanted to know God’s truth.  He hungered to know God’s truth.  He looked for the Messiah.  But verse 46 tells us he had a sin too.  He had a weakness.  “Nathanael said to Philip, ‘Can any good thing come out of Nazareth?’” You’ve got to be kidding.  Now, he didn’t live in anyplace that was that hot, frankly, Cana.  I mean, that is a dinky place.  But they had a little class in Cana.  Nazareth was a, was a despised, Nazareth was unrefined, you know, no class, rowdy place, wild place, uneducated.  It was the last stop before the Gentile world, you know?  I mean, it was out on the fringe.  I mean, nothing ever came out of Nazareth but trouble.

Well, I don’t know whether they had competition between the towns or not, but some kind of thing had built up in Nathanael’s heart and he showed an ugly sin and that sin is the sin of prejudice.  He shows prejudice toward a town.  You know what prejudice is?  It is an uncalled for generalization based on feelings of superiority.  It’s an uncalled for generalization based on feelings of superiority.  He just blanketed the whole town of Nazareth and said nothing good’s ever going to come out of there.  Prejudice is ugly.

… Well, Philip offered him a solution at the end of verse 46, he says, “Come and see.  Now, we’re going to find out how deep his prejudice is.”  If he’s really, really prejudice he’s going to say, “Not on your life.  I wouldn’t go near.”  But if he’s got the kind of prejudice that can be overcome he’s going to respond, and he did respond.  Verse 47, he went and: “Jesus saw Nathanael coming and He said of him,” here he is, and he’s walking up ready to see this supposed Messiah from Nazareth and up walks the Lord and says, “Behold, an Israelite for real, in whom there is no hypocrisy.” 

… And to show you how really sincere he was, he said unto Him, verse 48: “How do You know me?”  How do You know this?  How do You know my heart?  And He knew he was a true Jew.  And He knew he was a God-seeker.  And He knew he was sincere.  How do You know that?  You just walk up and You know that.  How do You know that?  Jesus answered him, “Oh, before Philip ever went to get you I saw you under the fig tree.”  Oh, that blew his mind.  How do You know I was under a fig tree?  That’s where he was. 

… It became a place to be alone.  It became a place of prayer, and a place of meditation, and a place of contemplation, a place of communing with God, a place of searching the Scripture, a place of quietness.  And it may well be that Nathanael was out under the fig tree, as so many Jews did, and he was meditating and he was praying, in the quietness and the solitude, away from the activity of the house.  He was seeking God in the privacy of the shade of the fig tree.

And Jesus is saying to him: I saw you.  I saw you meditating, I saw you seeking, I saw your open heart.  I saw you in the secret place, the private place.  I saw your true desire.  I saw what was there and what you wanted to know, and I’m here.  Pretty exciting.

… Okay.  His desire overwhelmed his prejudice and off he went.  Well, that’s enough for him.  Nathanael verse 49: “Answered and said to Him, Rabbi, Thou art the Son of God; Thou art the King of Israel.”

You want to know something?  Three years later Philip wasn’t sure about that, whether He was God.  Nathanael knew it immediately.  He saw deity in His presence.  Philip’s concept was that the one who Moses spoke about is come but he wasn’t too sure who He was.  But Nathanael knew instantly: this is the Son of God.  Oh, what commitment.  Oh, what a heart.

… And look at verse 51 … just quickly, “He said unto him, ‘Verily, verily, I say unto you, from here on you’re going to see heaven open and you’re going to see angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of Man.’”

What is this?  In specific, He’s saying this: Nathanael, You think you saw heaven, you think you saw divine power in that omniscience?  From here on you’re going to see stuff going on all the time between heaven and earth.  You’re going to see heaven open, and angels going up and down, and the Son of Man working in response to heavenly power.  You’re going to be exposed to heaven come down, is what He’s saying.  And he was.  Miracle, after miracle, after miracle.  And it may well be that Nathanael understood the glory of Christ better than anybody else.  He never asked another question.  He never frames another query.  He never even appears the rest of the time in the whole account.  He was in, solid like a rock, at the start.

So, we meet Nathanael Bartholomew, the seeker of truth, prejudice but not bound by it, honest, open, a man of prayer, a man of meditation, a man who made a complete surrender to Christ, a man with a keen mind and a heart of faith.  He saw.  He understood.  And Jesus promised to him the most wonderful revelations, and everything he saw from then on he knew was heaven open, heaven open.  Philip was never sure what it was …

… Do you qualify among the unqualified?  Because if you do, the Lord wants to use you …

MacArthur chooses to cover Matthew before Thomas in this list:

Let’s take Matthew first, because we have already examined something of Matthew’s life in looking at chapter 9.

Yes, he did in full, which I wrote about several days ago because Matthew mentions his own calling in that chapter, half of which was read on the First Sunday after Trinity (Year A). In that exegesis, I quoted heavily from MacArthur’s description of the various types of tax collectors. Matthew was the lowest of the low, one of the ones who could make up taxes in order to feather his own nest. He was an extortioner, taking above and beyond what he should. He was an outcast of outcasts.

MacArthur explains why the evangelist wrote very little about himself in his own Gospel:

Matthew is mentioned in every list, always in the same group, but nothing is ever said about Matthew, and nothing is ever said by Matthew except one tiny little thing.  And look in Matthew 9:9, and that’s where you find it.  Mark and Luke both allude to the same thing in just the same few words, and that is the extent of everything we know about Matthew.  “And as Jesus passed forth from there He saw a man named Matthew sitting at the tax office, and He saith unto him, ‘Follow Me.’ And he arose and followed Him.”  And when Matthew puts his name in the list in chapter 10 verse 3 he says: “Matthew the tax collector.”  And may I hasten to add that no other disciple in the list is ever associated with his job.  Why does Matthew say, Matthew the tax collector?  I mean, that’s not something you’re proud of.  No.  A tax collector was the most hated, despised, despicable human being in the society of Israel.  And Matthew is showing us his genuine humility, and sense of sinful unworthiness.

Why does Matthew even comment about himself in [Chapter 9] verse 9?  “As Jesus passed forth from there He saw a man named Matthew and He said, ‘Follow Me.’“ What is the point of putting that there?  The point is: in verses 1 to 8, Matthew is giving a demonstration that Jesus came to forgive sin.  Verse 5: “Thy sins be forgiven thee.”  Verse 6: “The Son of Man hath power on earth to forgive sins.”  And Matthew slips himself in there in one verse to show that indeed Jesus can forgive sin, for he sees himself as the vilest sinner.  It may be a reason, that may be a reason why Matthew never speaks.  He never asks a question.  He never makes a comment.  He never appears in an incident.  He just is absolutely faceless and voiceless through the entire narrative of the gospels.  And it may be that his humility was born out of his overwhelming sense of sinfulness, that he was so overwrought by the sin of his life, that once forgiven, grace was so superabundant in his case that he felt himself unworthy to even speak a word.  And so, he is the silent man, until the Spirit of God asks him to pick up his pen.  And then, he is given the privilege of writing the opening of the New Testament: 28 chapters on the majesty of the King of Kings Himself …

I think what makes it so fascinating to me also: he also had a name Levi, which indicates that he really was in the flow of Jewish tradition. And what also is interesting is that in the gospel of Matthew, you might be interested to note, there are more quotes of the Old Testament than in Mark, Luke and John combined. So, Matthew knew the Old Testament. In fact, he quotes out of the three sections of the Old Testament that a Jew knew: the law, the prophets, and the Hagiographa, the Holy Writings. Matthew knew the law of God in the Old Testament. And yet, we have no idea of him at all being interested in spiritual things. But when Jesus comes along, verse 9, He says to him, “Follow Me,” and he arose and followed Him. Instantly.

Now, what is involved in this? First of all, he just walked away from his career. I mean, it wasn’t like the earlier guys who were fishermen. If they didn’t like what went on with Jesus there were always fish. Right? And there were always nets. And there were always boats. And they could go back. And in fact, they did in John 21, they all went back fishing. And the Lord showed them they couldn’t catch anything. But when Matthew walked away from that table, believe me, the Roman government would have somebody there the next day. And somebody was in line to buy into that, and he was cutting off his career for good. No lingering. Also, he was identifying with somebody who was equally rejected by the establishment, for the Pharisees and the scribes hated Jesus as much or more as they hated him as a publican. So, he was really going from the frying pan into the fire. It’s a high price he paid.

You say, well, why did he do that? Well, I’ll tell you why he did it. There is only one reason. This little section in chapter 9, the thread that keeps weaving its way through here, is the forgiveness of sin. In verse 10, Matthew calls a feast after Jesus calls him. And he gets together tax collectors and sinners. And Jesus is the guest of honor at the feast. You’ll remember when we studied that. And the Pharisees say, “Well, why does He hang around with tax collectors and sinners?” And Jesus says, “They that are well need not a physician but they that are sick. You better go and relearn your lesson that I am come not to call the righteous but,” what? “Sinners to repentance.” The point of the banquet then, was for Jesus to call sinners to repentance. So, the whole thread here is confession of sin, repentance and forgiveness, and Matthew plops himself in there because I think that’s the issue with him. Nobody in the world knew better his sin than Matthew knew. He knew he was a sinner. He knew his graft, his abuse, his extortion, his greed. He knew that he had betrayed his people. He knew that he could be bought for money. He knew that. And I believe he despised it. I believe he wanted out. I believe he wanted a way to get away from it, and he had heard about Jesus, and he had heard Him preach because he was in that little town of Capernaum. And I believe when Jesus came to him and said, “Follow Me,” he knew that inherent in that was the forgiveness of sin, and he ran to get that. And he was willing to say goodbye to his career and everything else because he wanted forgiveness.

What kind of people does God use? Stained glass saints? No. Vile, wretched, rotten sinners, the most despicable people in society who are willing to be forgiven. You say, yeah, but He can’t use them for much. Oh? How about writing the gospel that introduces the New Testament? You see, God is in the restoration business. He takes the unqualified and transforms them. That’s His business …

And so, we learn about his humility. I think we learn another thing. He had a heart for the lost. There are some people in this world who just kind of gravitate to the down and outers, you know? That must have been Matthew. I mean, if ever there was a discussion about whether the disciples ought to get involved with some riffraff, I’m sure Matthew would have led the parade toward the riffraff, having been one. I’m glad that when the Lord puts together a team of men, He takes some from out of the deepest pit, or some of us might never be willing to go back into that pit not knowing that something can really happen there, and that was Matthew.

… One writer calls it “The glorious unconventionality of the Lord Jesus Christ: he chooses the most unlikely people.”

Wikipedia says that Church tradition holds that Matthew preached in Ethiopia, where he was martyred:

… while preaching in Ethiopia, Matthew converted and then consecrated to God, Ephigenia of Ethiopia, the virgin daughter of the Aethiopian King Egippus.^[13] When King Hirtacus succeeded Egippus, he asked the apostle if he could persuade Ephigenia to marry him. Matthew thus invited King Hirtacus to Mass the following Sunday where he rebuked him for lusting after the girl, as she was a nun and therefore was the bride of Christ. The enraged King thus ordered his bodyguard to kill Matthew who stood at the altar, making him a martyr.^[14]

We next come to Thomas, also called Didymus, which means ‘twin’.

MacArthur says:

Thomas is a better man than you think. In fact, I’m convinced that most people really don’t understand Thomas. We just say Thomas the doubter. I think you’re going to learn some things about Thomas you didn’t know …

MacArthur presents John 11, which has the story of our Lord’s dear friend Lazarus, whom He raised from the dead. This took place just before Passion Week — Holy Week. Jesus and His disciples knew that the atmosphere in Jerusalem at that point was hot. The Jewish hierarchy wanted to kill our Lord. Lazarus and his sisters Mary and Martha lived in Bethany, just two miles outside the city.

Naturally, almost all of the Apostles were reluctant to go to Bethany, however, Thomas was ready to take that risk:

And Thomas apparently moves into this situation with some leadership, verse 16: “Then,” said Thomas, who is called Didymus, which means the twin, he had a twin brother or sister likely. “And he says to the fellow disciples, ‘Let’s also go that we may die with Him.’“

Now, I see several things in that. First of all I see a certain amount of initiative. Don’t you see that? He kind of takes over doesn’t he? He kind of rises to the top and says, “Wait a minute, guys, let’s go with Him and die with Him.” I also see pessimism, don’t you? I see some pessimism. Now, he was convinced Jesus was going to be killed. And if they went, they would die. I mean, it was all very clear to him.

You know, the greatest courage in the world is not the courage of an optimist. An optimist is couraged, has courage because he believes the best will happen. The greatest courage in the world is the courage of a pessimist because he knows the worse is going to happen and is willing to go anyway. You see? Thomas says, “We’ll die, so let’s go.” That’s a lot of courage. I think it was cut and dry with him; he had already figured out his epitaph and everything. He could only see disaster but he was grimly determined to die with Christ. Much tougher for a pessimist than an optimist.

… I believe this: I believe that Thomas, perhaps only equaled by John, had such a deep and intense love for Jesus that he could not endure existence without Him. Do you understand that? And I believe what he’s reflecting here is: if Jesus is going to die, then let’s go die with Him, because the alternative is to be without Him. You see? Let’s go with Him. Let’s go with Him. These are the words of love. These are the words of faith. He believed he could die and be with Jesus …

… Go to chapter 14 and we see him again, and the same attitudes come out again. Jesus gives this little message about letting not your heart be troubled, and believing in God, and He’s going to prepare a place for you, and I’ll come again and receive you unto Myself and where I am there you may be also, and whither I go you know, and the way you know. He says, “You know where I am going and you know how to get there.” Verse 5: “Thomas saith unto Him, ‘Lord, we know not where Thou goest and how can we know the way?’“ This is the same heart that’s saying, “Lord, don’t You go somewhere where we can’t come.” It’s the same thing. The thought of separation was the issue with Thomas. I don’t like what I hear. You’re going to go, and we’re not going to know where You are or how to get there. His heart, I think, is nearly broken as he speaks. And he’s a pessimistic, and he says, “We’ll never find the place.” It’s a bleak, negative, bewildered heart.

Jesus tells him, “Thomas, I am the way, the truth and the life; no man cometh unto the Father but by Me.” What He’s saying is, “I’ll take you, Thomas. I’ll take you there. I’m the way, you don’t have to fear. I’m not going to go someplace and leave you.” You see the same pessimism again, don’t you? And you see the same love again.

MacArthur thinks that Thomas did not show up with the Eleven post-Resurrection to see Jesus the first time because he was depressed:

Let’s go to a third and last look at Thomas. John 20. Jesus died. You know what happened to Thomas when Jesus died? He said, “I knew it. He died, and I didn’t die, and He went somewhere, and I don’t know where He is. I knew it.” And all of his fears came true, all of the worst things that he had ever thought. He felt betrayed. He felt rejected. He felt forsaken. And it was out of love, that he was shattered. He was like a wounded animal. And he didn’t want to be around people, and so he just split. That’s what he did. And when all the rest of the disciples came together he just wasn’t there, he was out, and he was depressed because he loved so deeply. He would have died with Jesus, but Jesus died without him. He wanted to go with Jesus but Jesus went without him. And now, his pessimism is vindicated, and he’s really in the pits.

And in verse 24 it says: “Thomas, one of the 12, called Didymus, wasn’t with them when Jesus came.” Sure, he was out licking his wounds. And Jesus appeared to the remaining disciples, and Thomas wasn’t there. Well, guess who found Thomas? John, verse 25, “The other disciple,” other disciples, I would guess John; that’s a stab in the dark, “said to him, ‘We have seen the Lord.’“ We’ve seen the Lord, Thomas, and you weren’t there. You didn’t show up.

But Thomas is depressed. Did you ever try to talk to somebody who is depressed? Really difficult isn’t it? Very difficult. He says, “Except I shall see in His hands the print of the nails, put my finger into the print of the nails, thrust my hand into His side, I will not believe.” Now, he’s a pessimist. Admit it. I’ve got to see it. But before you pounce on him with both feet, would you kindly remember this? That none of the disciples believed until they saw Jesus. I mean, after all, it is not that easy to believe that somebody rose from the dead. I mean, on the road to Emmaus in Luke 24, two are walking along, and the Lord is with them, and they’re moaning and groaning about His death. And they don’t believe either. Nobody believed till they saw Him. So, don’t make Thomas the doubter. You see, he’s a loving pessimist is what he is. That’s better than being a doubter. I want to see before I believe, he says.

So, the Lord, by the way, in case you don’t know, the Lord doesn’t mind people wanting to be sure. If you want to be sure, He’ll accommodate that desire. “Eight days after,” verse 26 says, “the disciples were inside, and Thomas was with them. Jesus came, the doors being shut.” I like that. Just rearranged the molecules in His body and came through the wall. And always He says, when He does that, “Peace be unto you.” It’s understandable. It seems a fitting greeting, doesn’t it? To the chaos that must have occurred. And then, He zeroes in on this dear soul that loves Him enough to die with Him, and is utterly depressed and shattered. He said to Thomas, “Thomas, reach here your finger, behold My hands, and reach here your hand, and thrust it into My side, and be not faithless but believing.” Did Thomas do that? It doesn’t say he did it. It just says immediately, without doing anything, “He answered and said unto Him, ‘My Lord and my God.’“ The greatest single confessional ever made. He affirmed the deity of Jesus Christ. He affirmed the lordship of Jesus Christ. He affirmed that He was God.

… Thomas, yes he was melancholy, he was moody, pessimistic, comfortless, shattered, but when he saw the Lord Jesus Christ, oh my, he gave the greatest testimony ever given. And you know what? In that one little statement, Thomas gave the speech that literally destroys every lie that has been told about Jesus not being God that has ever been uttered in the history of man. It is a monumental statement, “My God,” he said. The –isms, and –chisms, and spasms and Yogis and all the rest that come and deny the deity of Christ are put to silence by Thomas.

Thomas was also martyred:

Thomas, tradition tells us a lot about him. Preached. Some say he went as far as India preaching. And one tradition says that he died in a very special way. They took a spear and rammed it through him, because of his faith in Christ. It would be a kind of fitting climax for one who was told to reach forth his hand and feel the spear mark in his own Lord.

Next comes James, the son of Alphaeus.

MacArthur says that although he, like some of the other Apostles, is relatively obscure, their names are listed in the New Testament for a reason:

Whenever the list of 12 is given, and it’s given four times in the Scripture, and all the names always appear in the same group of four, and they move away in intimacy from Christ.  But they are all wonderfully chosen by the Lord, they all preached the kingdom, they all taught the truths of the kingdom, they all healed the sick and they all cast out demons.  They were the first order of kingdom preachers after Christ Himself, and they will reign on thrones ruling the 12 tribes of Israel in the millennium.  I mean they are remarkable for what the Lord transformed them into.

James, the son of Alphaeus, is St James the Less.

Of him, Wikipedia says:

Long-standing tradition identifies James, the son of Alphaeus, as James the Less. James, son of Zebedee, is then called “James the Great” (although that designation does not appear in the New Testament). Some propose that Alphaeus was the same man as Cleophas or at least the husband of Mary Clopas …

In Catholic tradition, James’s mother is none other than Mary of Clopas who was among the women at the foot of the Cross of Jesus, weeping. For that reason, and given the fact that the Semitic word for brother is also used for other close relatives, James son of Alpheus is often held as a cousin to Jesus. He is also thought by some to be the brother of Matthew the Apostle, since the father of both was named Alphaeus (compare Mark 2:14 and 3:18).

Modern Biblical scholars are divided on whether this identification is correct.

We won’t know for sure until we get to heaven.

MacArthur also runs through the possibilities and mentions why he is called ‘the Less’:

Do you know what the Bible says about him?  Absolutely nothing.  That’s right, nothing.  Just his name …

Never wrote anything, never said anything, never asked anything, never did anything recorded in the Bible.  In fact, in Mark 15:40 he is called James the mikros, the little, little James.  Guess who big James was?  Big James, son of thunder.  Little James, he was just little James.

The word mikros basically means small in stature.  It could indicate that he was little.  It also can mean young in age.  It could mean that he was little and young.  It also could mean that he was least in influence.  So, he was little, and young, and not very influential.  I kind of think he probably was all three of those things, and that’s why they sort of gave him that nickname, little James.  James the Less, as he’s called by Mark.  If he was older than James the son of Zebedee, they probably wouldn’t have called him mikros because it would have confused people.  They probably would have called him the elder James or the older James.  So, it probably indicates that he was younger.  And if he was big in stature, they probably wouldn’t have called him little James.  And if he had a lot of influence, they probably never would have nicknamed him little James; they probably would have nicknamed him something according to his influence, like bold James or something.  So, it may well be that he was just a small, little, young fella who wasn’t a particularly powerful personality. 

However:

James the son of Alphaeus will sit on a throne reigning over one of the tribes of Israel in the millennium, and what do you know about him?  You don’t know anything about him.  Well, what’s the point?  That God is the power, right?  Not James.  The Bible doesn’t say a thing about him.  His work, his personality, nothing.  His mark is obscurity, and I think it’s kind of neat that the Lord put one guy in here who is utterly obscure.  He’s the most obscure of all of them.  He didn’t ask any questions, he didn’t say anything, we don’t know anything about him.  It may be that he just was obedient all the time and there wasn’t a lot to say about that …  James never appears; maybe he was just on target all the time. 

That said, MacArthur has one-upped Wikipedia with a traditional story about James the Less’s ministry. He, too, finished as a martyr:

Oh, there is one faint tradition about him.  The early church fathers say he preached in Persia.  Persia is ancient Iran, and that he took the gospel of Jesus Christ to that land, and they refused to hear him preach, and they crucified him.  I wonder what the world would be like today if Iran had heard the gospel, preached by James, the son of Alphaeus. 

MacArthur also mentions the possible link between James the Less and Matthew:

According to Mark 2:14, Matthew’s called Levi, Levi or Matthew, same one, and it says, “Levi,” Mark 2:14, “son of Alphaeus.”  There is a remote possibility that James was Matthew’s brother.

MacArthur says that what we know and don’t know about the Apostles is not important. The big picture is Christ, always:

May I speak to you from my heart for just a minute?  The apostles, and you see this, and it’s just coming clear to me as I’m going through this series: the apostles demonstrate to us that it is never really the worker who is the issue in the kingdom work.  It’s never the worker.  I don’t think I ever really understood before what Paul meant when he said, “So, what is Apollos and what is Paul?  It is God that gives the increase.”  First Corinthians 3.  The worker is nothing.  So, that the New Testament never even focuses on these guys.  I mean, it doesn’t say, now you, you people, the important thing is to study these 12 men.  Now, we want you to understand their career, their style, their method, their means.  The Bible doesn’t pick out the best preacher and give you his homiletic method.  The Bible doesn’t pick out the one who was the best healer, or the most effective at something or another.  It doesn’t even deal with them.  The only time the apostles are ever mentioned in the Scripture is when they intersect with Christ for a specific purpose.  He is the focus.  There’s never a diversion.  You don’t have any record of the career of any disciple.  You don’t have the record of any career of any apostle, because they are not the issue.  The human instrument is immaterial to God.  He can use Balaam’s ass if He has to.  He can make the rocks cry out if He has to.  The human instrument is not the issue.  You don’t have to be way up here intellectually or in the gifted category, that is not the issue.  The Bible never deals with that.  The focus is always on Jesus Christ, and these people just go in and out of the picture, and usually they ask dumb questions.

… And someday you can read the heavenly record for yourself, and find out all that the Bible doesn’t say.

And, finally, for today, we come to Thaddaeus.

Thaddaeus had another name, Lebbaeus:

Verse 3, “Lebbaeus, whose surname was Thaddaeus.”  And if you look in Luke 6:16, and Acts 1:13, you don’t have to look it up, you’ll find he had a third name: Judas, son of James.  And he’s [in] one place called Judas, not Iscariot.  Judas also was a common name.  It means Jehovah leads, and many people in that time named their son, Jehovah leads, God leads.  This is Judas.  That’s probably his given name, and then he probably received the names Lebbaeus and Thaddaeus as people add names, almost like nicknames.  Thaddaeus is a fascinating word.  It comes from a Hebrew root thad which has to do with a female breast.  And basically, Thaddaeus means breast child, and it likely reflects the fact that Thaddaeus was the baby of his family.  It was common to have large families.  Thaddaeus was the baby, he was Thaddaeus.  You’ve seen a mother.  She comes up and says, “I want you to meet my baby,” and she looks up, and the guy’s 6’5”, you know?  This is my baby.  Well, that’s the baby of the family, that’s the last one, right?  That’s the breast child.  That’s just a little colloquialism perhaps, for the baby.  And so, to his family he was the baby.  He was breast child, especially cherished by his mother probably.  And then, he was called also, Lebbaeus.  Now that may be a nickname too and it comes from the Hebrew root leb, which means heart, and it means a heart child.  And a heart child was someone with a great heart, and usually that was related to courage. 

So, his family saw him as their baby and it may well be that the disciples kind of nicknamed him, or other men who knew him nicknamed him Lebbaeus, because that reflected his courage.  He may have been a man of courage.  Now, we can’t be sure about these things, but it may well be that from his mother’s perspective he was the tender baby, but from his friend’s perspective he was a man of hard courage.  He too is wrapped in obscurity.  He would never make the “Who’s Who” either. 

We have only one mention of him and that is in John 14:

But he did ask one very important question, and it’s the only time we meet him in the Scripture.  John 14 ... Jesus speaking, the night before His trial, and He says in verse 21, “He that hath my commandments, and keepth them, he it is that loveth me; he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I’ll love him, and manifest myself to him.”  That is an incredible statement.  You could sit and look at that, and think about it, and dwell on it for hours.  You keep your commandments, you show you love Me.  That’s all it says basically.  I can tell who loves Me; they obey Me.  You may claim to love God and love Christ, you don’t obey, that claim is a lie.  He that keeps My commandments is the one that loves Me.  “And the one who loves me will be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and manifest myself to him.”  That is an incredibly important statement.  God can only be manifest to a heart that loves Him.  That’s the reason people in the world don’t know God.  That’s the reason they can’t perceive the truth, because they don’t love God.  There has to be a love toward God, a willingness to obey, and then God is manifest.  The point being, here’s the sum of it: God is only manifest to a loving heart, did you get that?  That’s all.  Only to those who love Him is He manifest.

Now, the word manifest triggers this thought, and Judas, Lebbaeus, Thaddaeus responds in verse 22, “Judas said unto him,” not Iscariot, a different Judas, Judas, son of James, “Lord, how is it that thou wilt manifest thyself unto us, and not unto the world?”  You’re saying that only those who love You are going to see You and know You, and You will be manifest only to those who love You.  How can You manifest Yourself to us and not unto the world?  What does he mean?  Well, he’s thinking of the manifestation as an outward one.  You see he came into the apostolate like so many others did, thinking of an earthly kingdom, an earthly rule, an overthrow of Rome, great expectation of establishing the earthly kingdom.  And he’s saying to Him: how could You possibly fulfill the Messianic hope, how could You possibly set up the kingdom on earth, how could you possibly reign on the throne of David, how could You possibly demonstrate who You are, and the world not see it?  I mean, how could You do that?  How could it be done in such a way that they wouldn’t see? 

And there may be another allusion in his statement.  He may be also saying: why would You think of manifesting Yourself only to us?  I mean, this motley group of nobodies.  I mean, if You’re the Messiah, and this is the moment, why would You only show Yourself to us?  I mean, it is the world that the Messiah is to rule.  It’s a good question.  Why won’t everybody see You?  I mean if it’s the time for the kingdom, let’s get it on, and you might see a little of that courage that he perhaps was known for.  Let’s go for it, Lord.  The whole world needs to know.  Why do You just want to show us?  But you see, he didn’t understand, and so the Lord says again, “If a man love me, he’ll keep my words; and my Father will love him, and we will come to him, and make our abode with him.”  And He repeats the same principle.  The point is this, Judas, Lebbaeus, Thaddaeus: the only people who will perceive Me are the ones who love Me, that’s all.  And verse 24, “He that loves me not keeps not my sayings; and the word which you hear is not mine, but the Father’s, who sent me.”  In other words, the one who doesn’t love Me doesn’t know what I’m talking about, and doesn’t know it came from God.  He says, manifestation is limited to reception.  It’s like a radio station.  You can send the signal out but until you turn on the set you can’t receive it.

There is a splendid Church tradition about Thaddaeus:

By the way, early church tradition tells us about Thaddaeus, that he was tremendously gifted with the power of God to heal the sick.  And a certain king in Syria by the name of Abgar heard about it, and was ill, and he called for Thaddaeus to come and heal him.  And on the way, he healed multiple hundreds of people throughout Syria, and when he finally reached the king he healed the king, and presented the gospel to the king, and the legend says the king became a Christian.  This threw the country into such chaos that an apostate nephew of the king seized Thaddaeus, made him a prisoner, and martyred him, and he was killed in Syria.  If you ever pick up an old church history book on Thaddaeus, you will see that each of the disciples have a symbol, and the symbol for Thaddaeus is a big club, because the legend says they beat him to death with a club.  Faithful to his Lord.

What a marvellous story. I always pay attention to these early Church traditions, because the people who recorded them were much closer to the earliest Christian saints in history than we are.

We have two more Apostles to cover. Their stories will follow tomorrow.