Question 139: Were any of the disciples married?

Answer:

Very little is known regarding the domestic relations of the apostles beyond what is disclosed in the Gospels. Matthew 8:15 clearly implies that Peter was married. Bartholomew is said by tradition to have been the bridegroom at the wedding at Cana and Philip is mentioned by Clement of Alexandria as having had a wife and children. Nothing definite can be asserted concerning the others, although they are generally assumed to have been unmarried.

Question 138: What was the gift of tongues retained by the Apostles until their death?

Answer:

The endowment of the "gift of tongues" was apparently continued to the believers during the apostolic age. Yeshua before His ascension breathed upon His disciples and said. "Receive ye Ruach HaKodesh." Fifty days after the crucifixion, the disciples received special power, when Ruach HaKodesh came upon them. It was to be a sign - to belong to only a few - the apostles and evangelists - and with this gift they went forth to preach to the nations. Later, Paul wrote that he "spake with tongues more than all." In 1 Corinthians 13 however, we see that "tongues" were already ceasing, as belonging to the past. Many times, since then the question has arisen whether the gift of tongues was continued to succeeding generations. The attitude of the early Church, neither to quench nor forbid them (see 1 Thessalonians 5:19), yet not to invite or excite them, was a safe one. If they were of YHVH, the fact would make itself apparent; if they were simply hysterical jargon, they would quickly subside. Throughout Church history, there were many spurious instances. Iremeus wrote of some in his time who spoke with tongues, but Eusebius hardly referred to the subject and Chrysostom mentions it only to discourage what he considered as an ecstatic indulgence of doubtful spiritual profit.

Question 137: Were the Apostles converted before the day of Shavuot?

Answer:

Yeshua had said many things to and about His disciples before His deaths which indicated that they were converted men: "Rejoice, because your names are written in heaven," Luke 10:20; "Now ye are clean through the word that I have spoken unto you," John 15:3; "Ye know Him" (the Spirit of truth), "for He dwelleth with you and shall be in you." In the last verse He distinguishes them from "the world." The world he said, cannot receive the Spirit; but the Spirit was already with the disciples and was to come into their hearts in greater fullness, as He did on the day of Shavuot. In the high-priestly prayer Yeshua said: "I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given Me; for they are Thine;" "They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world;" "Thine they were and Thou gavest them Me; and they have kept Thy Word," John 17:9, 14, 16. Although Peter was a converted man, he fell into sin and denied his Master. It is the common experience of justified believers that, while they do not habitually sin, they slip occasionally into transgression. But after the fullness of the Spirit had been received on the day of Shavuot, Peter and the other apostles stood firm. This also has been the experience of many believers since the apostles' time, who have found, in a larger blessing, sanctifying and keeping grace. Jacob's experience was the same. Before his blessing at Jabbok, he had met YHVH at Bethel and received the promise: "I will not leave thee" (Genesis 28:15); YHVH had spoken to him again, while he dwelt with Laban (Genesis 31:3-11); the angels of YHVH met him at Mahanaim (Genesis 32:2). But after the experience at Jabbok or Peniel, he lived to the end of his days a purer, higher spiritual life.

Frequently asked questions and answers:

Question 136: Was it repentance or remorse that drove Judas to suicide?

Answer:

All we know is what the Scripture tells us. It may have been remorse or chagrin over the failure of his plans, but it could hardly have been repentance. It was suggested by De Quincey, with some plausibility, that in betraying Moshiach, he was seeking to precipitate a crisis, out of which he expected to see Moshiach emerge triumphant He thought Moshiach would use his miraculous power to save himself and when in danger of death, would declare himself King and would set up his kingdom, in which the disciples would hold high office. When he found that Moshiach intended to submit, he perceived that his scheme to force his hand had failed and he was overwhelmed by the catastrophe he had precipitated. The suggestion is not sustained by the conception we gain of him in the Gospels, but it is possible to imagine an ambitious and avaricious man acting in that way; if as is possible, he was impatient with Moshiach, who had powers so great and yet was so slow to use them to advance his own interests and those of the men who had left all to follow him, he may have tried this scheme. The suggestion however, is pure conjecture. No one has been able to analyse satisfactorily the character of Judas.

Question 135: How did Judas really die?

Answer:

Several explanations of the apparent discrepancy between Matthew 27:3-5 and Acts 1:18, 19 have been offered. The first, with relation to the death of Judas is that the word translated as "hanged" in Matthew 27:5 is capable of a different interpretation, i.e., death by a sudden spasm of suffocation, which might have been accompanied by a fall before the spasm spent itself. Another suggestion, which has been made by some eminent scholars, is that the work of suicide was but half accomplished when, the halter parting, Judas fell with the result stated in Acts 1:18.

Question 134: In what sense was Judas a devil?

Answer:

Little is known of the life of Judas before his appearance among the apostles. He was probably drawn by the Baptist's preaching or by his own ambitious hopes of the coming of a Messianic Kingdom, in which he might play an important and lucrative part. He seems to have declared himself a disciple of Yeshua as the others did and as he was entrusted with the finances of the little company, we may judge that he enjoyed a measure of confidence, although this seems to have been undeserved. (See John 12:6.) That Yeshua himself knew the heart of Judas from the beginning is made clear from the text. (See also John 6:64-71.) Our Saviour knew his inmost thoughts. He knew Judas to be deceitful and treacherous. He knew of his criminal confidences with the priests, which culminated in the betrayal. (See John 18:3-5.) The act of betrayal was not the outcome of a sudden impulse at the Last Supper, but was the closing scene in a long career of deceit and treachery. Judas was probably ambitious and like several other apostles believed that Yeshua would set up an earthly kingdom in which he himself might have an influential part of his early history before his name appears in the list of the apostles, nothing is known. The name "Iscariot" is variously explained, some writers holding that he was so called because he belonged to Kerioth in the tribe of Judah

Question 133: For what purpose was Judas chosen as a disciple?

Answer:

He was attracted as the others were, by the preaching of the Baptist or by his own Messianic hopes. It can be imagined however, that baser motives may have mingled with his faith and zeal. He must have possessed some qualifications, probably plausibility being one and he may even have excelled the rest of the twelve in business ability. Again, he may have joined the twelve in all sincerity and yielded to temptation only when he found the handling of the money made him covetous. It was evident that Yeshua knew from the beginning what Judas would do (John 6:64). Volumes have been written in the futile effort to explain why Judas was chosen.

Question 132: What was Paul’s “Thorn in the flesh”?

Answer:

It referred to some bodily affliction affecting him individually and physically, but not his work as an apostle. In Galatians 4:13, 14 he refers to it as an "infirmity of my flesh" - some form of bodily sickness which had detained him among the Galatians. It was probably something that caused him acute pain and also some degree of shame, since it "buffeted" him (1 Peter 2:20). There have been many conjectures as to its real character. Some have imagined it to be blasphemous thoughts and others; remorse for his former life; but the most probable view is that it was an affliction which caused him physical annoyance, possibly a disorder of the eyes or some nervous ailment. At all events, we are assured that it was so persistent and recurrent that he speaks of it in terms of apology and mortification.

Frequently asked questions and answers:

Question 131: Was Peter converted before his denial of Moshiach?

Answer:

Peter was a man of resolute character, bold and decisive. He was easily the leader of the twelve. Honest-hearted and warmly attached to Moshiach, he believed himself immovably loyal; yet in the hour of temptation, he proved unstable and weak. Yeshua knew his heart and warned him against overconfidence in his own loyalty. "I have been praying for thee," he said, "that thy faith fails not." He needed this divine strengthening. His faith had failed once before in a crisis (see Matthew 14:29) and what he needed to confirm him now was the "power from on high" which would come later. The tempter was to sift all the disciples and Yeshua foresaw Peter's weakness, but he was preserved from falling by this special intercession. His case shows, perhaps more completely than any other in the New Testament, the weakness of the natural and the strength of the spiritual man. Even at the moment of his denial of Moshiach, it needed but a glance from the eye of his Saviour to make him instantly repentant. After the enduement with Ruach HaKodesh he stood forth as the leader of the apostles, faithful unto death.