significance of all male disciples

An argument often brought up in discussions about women in church leadership is that Jesus' twelve apostles were all male. I know that this is different than those in his inner circle. What is the biblical and theological siginificance of all male and only Jewish disciples? Mary J. Evans, Women in the Bible: An Overview of All the Crucial Passages on Women’s Roles (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1983), on page 57, acknowledges the all male group of apostles, but states that “it is not clear what significance this was intended to have for the church.”

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

DMB

The pesky 12 are troublesome for generalizing favored church doctrines:

- They were all jewish. And acted as the base-authority for later ortho-maintenance.

- All from Galilee, except maybe the new 12th.

- One at least was married. No mention of the others.

- Two mention John the Baptist background, and the new 12th had to be there since John the Baptist.

- Several were self-employed; at least one worked at the behest of government.

- They all had powers to heal and remove demons.

So, I'm thinking 'guys' is the obvious key. Not the other stuff. Oddly, it's hard to even use synogogue practice.

I get the feeling, you're rabbit-trailing again?

MJ. Smith

This is strictly a theological question just as what is the significance of the first witnesses to the resurrection being all female. Theological questions do not belong in the forums.

As you say, the intended significance, if any, is unknown.

“it is not clear what significance this was intended to have for the church.”

So what makes you think forums users will have a answer when scholars/students on the topic do not? Are you testing us for hubris? Or did you not consider whether the question was well formed?

Again, try a chat bot before trying to use the forums as a research assistant - forums are intended to be a software teaching assistant which sometimes involves the identification of resources and the meanings of words.

Mary Magdalene is referred to as the "13th apostle" for a few reasons:

Witness to the Resurrection: The Gospels depict Mary Magdalene as the first witness to Jesus's resurrection. This pivotal role in spreading the news of Christ's return led some to view her as an apostle-like figure, even though she wasn't one of the original twelve chosen by Jesus.

Title: "Apostle to the Apostles": The term "apostle to the apostles" comes from later theologians like Thomas Aquinas (13th century). It reflects the idea that Mary Magdalene's role in proclaiming the resurrection was essential in convincing the apostles, who initially doubted the news.

Recent Developments: In 2016, Pope Francis elevated Mary Magdalene's feast day to a level similar to the feasts of the twelve apostles. This highlights a growing recognition of her significance within Catholicism.

It's important to note that the concept of Mary Magdalene as a literal 13th apostle isn't universally accepted. The term is mostly symbolic, emphasizing her critical role in spreading the faith alongside the apostles.

The Bible itself doesn't explicitly state the reasons Jesus chose only male, Jewish disciples. However, theologians have proposed several explanations:

Cultural Context: First-century Judea was a patriarchal society with strict gender roles. Public religious leadership roles were typically reserved for men. Jesus, operating within this context, may have chosen disciples in a way that wouldn't have been seen as radical or disruptive.

Symbolism of Twelve: The number twelve held significance, reflecting the twelve tribes of Israel. Choosing twelve Jewish men could symbolize Jesus' message as an extension of God's covenant with the Jewish people.

Focus on Israel: Jesus' initial ministry primarily targeted the lost sheep of the house of Israel (Matthew 15:24). Choosing Jewish disciples aligned with this focus.

The all-male aspect is a separate issue. The Gospels do mention women who followed Jesus and supported his ministry (Luke 8:1-3). Some argue Jesus defied cultural norms by interacting with women openly, suggesting the discipleship wasn't limited by gender but focused on a specific leadership role.

Theologically, the implications are debated:

Limited Application: Some see the male-only aspect as culturally bound, not a universal principle. The spread of Christianity beyond Judea to Gentiles is viewed as a shift, making gender irrelevant for leadership roles.

Focus on Function: Another view emphasizes the function of the disciples – to continue Jesus' mission. If cultural norms limited their selection, it doesn't diminish the message they carried.

Ultimately, the significance depends on theological interpretation. It's important to consider the historical context alongside the message of Jesus himself.

In both answers Gemini gives enough information to get one started on further research.

MJ. Smith

I get the feeling, you're rabbit-trailing again?

I've just come up with the concept of puca-trailing for slightly different connotations.

DAL

You seem to be biting on more than you can chew. It’s like you’re studying too many topics at the same time. Not good if you ask me. Don’t stress yourself too much. Stay healthy!

DAL

Sean

I really think discussions like this would be better suited for something like a FaithLife group than the software support forums.

Christian Alexander

Not rabbit hunting but just looking into some critical points I want to address as part of my plan. It is like a study within a study. Your points do make sense.

Allen Browne

Not rabbit hunting but just looking into some critical points I want to address as part of my plan. It is like a study within a study. Your points do make sense.

Christian, check out https://allenbrowne.blog/2017/09/27/why-no-women-among-jesus-apostles/

There's a few quotes at the end of the article. Just one perspective of course.