closer to the time of Jesus, does not use the expression “disciple,” not even once. Now, that in itself is a huge piece of data that raises all kinds of questions: why didn’t he see himself as a disciple but rather as an apostle of Jesus Christ? Are the terms synonymous? For if they are, then Paul may have meant “disciple of Jesus Christ” when he writes “apostle of Jesus Christ.” But the terms are not synonymous. In the Gospels it is only the Twelve who are called apostles (Matt 10:1–2; Mark 6:20; Luke 6:13; 9:10; 22:14; 24:10). And in Mark and Matthew, they are the only ones who are “sent” with a specific mission. The rest of the disciples are not given specific instructions, except that they are to follow Jesus and be willing to give their lives for the gospel (Mark 8:34–38). Things change in Luke, though, where besides the Twelve, seventy others are sent by Jesus to proclaim the kingdom of God (10:1–24). This is found only in Luke and may point to his understanding of Jesus’ mission as including also the Gentiles. Conversely, it may betray a Mosaic theme by which Jesus is turned into a new Moses who chooses leaders from the people in order to “share the burden” of the proclamation (cf. Num 11:17).64
In the book of Acts, this identification of the apostles with the Twelve is especially clear when the group has to find a replacement for Judas. Luke writes:
Then they prayed and said, “Lord, you know everyone’s heart. Show us which one of these two you have chosen to take the place in this ministry and apostleship from which Judas turned aside to go to his own place.” And they cast lots for them, and the lot fell on Matthias; and he was added to the eleven apostles. (Acts 1:24–26)
This sets up the chain of authority in the nascent church. Authority is going to come from God, through the Holy Spirit, directly into the hands of the apostles. In fact, the distinction between the apostles and the Holy Spirit is at times blurred, as is the case in Acts 5:3, where lying to the apostles is equated with lying to the Holy Spirit. The twelve apostles are the ones who, together with the elders (15:2, 4, 6, 22, 23; 16:4) and the Holy Spirit, make the big decisions (15:28). The difference between the disciples and the apostles is clear in passages such as Acts 6:1–7, where a number of deacons are chosen by the apostles from amongst the disciples to serve the growing needs of the community.
Another feature of the book of Acts is that it refers to the early movement as “the Way” (9:2; 18:25; 19:9, 23; 22:4; 24:14, 22). This talks about the movement as a people in motion, on their way, following as disciples the teachings of the apostles, those who had witnessed the ministry and the resurrection of Jesus from the dead (cf. Acts 1:22). Unlike them, Paul’s claim to apostleship depended on his having had a vision of the risen Christ. He knew nothing about Jesus’ earthly ministry. He did not witness it, and because of that, his authority was questioned many times; he had to defend himself by saying that he had received his apostleship directly from the Lord, as a revelation, not from any human leader such as Peter or James (cf. Galatians 2). He distinguished himself clearly from the apostles in Jerusalem, and yet he spoke of himself as an apostle, called by God to preach the gospel to the Gentiles. Using the term “disciple” would have amounted to recognizing a link to the earthly followers of Jesus or to the beginning stages of the church, where believers were called by that name. Paul would not have any of that. His preaching had to do with the power of God manifested in Christ’s resurrection. He emphasizes the lordship of Christ, not his teachings. Rather than following the teachings of an earthly Messiah, the believers were to experience the power of the Holy Spirit as it is manifested in the ekklesia. For Paul, Christ was the Son of God, not the Son of Man of the Gospels; he was the Lord of the universe, not the prophet from Galilee. As the Lord, Jesus required unconditional allegiance and obedience, not simply adherence to his teachings. No, Paul could not use the word “disciple” to talk about those who believe in Jesus as the Christ. He used the word “believers,” for that is what they were. Coming as they did from a Gentile background, they lacked the knowledge of the Jewish traditions, which would have qualified them as followers of a Jewish rabbi. They were more accustomed to experiencing the power of the Greco-Roman deities in the liturgical context of the Greek temples. They did not have a doctrine that they could follow, or books with the teachings of the founder that they could read. They came to the temples and engaged in liturgical practices (prayers, sacrifices, etc.) that assured them that the gods’ blessings on their lives would result in good fortune. Paul switched the pagan gods with the Lord Jesus Christ and assured them of much more comprehensive benefits, such as life after death in God’s presence, or being taken up while still living at the Parousia of Jesus Christ from heaven, which would put an end to their suffering. Good fortune was not in Paul’s mind but rather eternal life. What Paul preached was not a way of life, but a way out of a life of enslavement into which humans have been brought by two cosmic powers: death and sin. By sharing in Christ’s death and resurrection through baptism, people were sanctified, becoming members of the body of Christ, empowered by the Holy Spirit with gifts to nurture the body while they waited for the coming of the Lord from heaven. In Paul’s mind, there is no time for forming disciples, only time to snatch people from the fires of hell preparing them for God’s glorious reality which was about to be revealed.
If we take a sample of Paul’s terminology from Romans 16, we see that he refers to people using a variety of terms, but he avoids the word “disciple.” He uses terms of endearment to express how he felt about certain people who were emotionally very close to him: “beloved” (vv. 5, 9, 12), “beloved in the Lord” (v. 8), and “eminent in the Lord” (v. 13). He uses technical terms to refer to some people’s specific function in the church, for example, “deaconess” (v. 1) and “apostles” (v. 7). He uses descriptive terms to talk about people’s relationship to him, whether as an individual: “mother to me” (v. 13), “benefactor/helper” (v. 2) or as an apostle: “fellow workers” (vv. 3, 21), “compatriot” (vv. 7, 11, 21), “fellow prisoners” (v. 7), “fellow worker in Christ” (v. 9), “approved in Christ” (v. 10), and “workers in the Lord” (v. 12). Finally, he uses terminology that refers to people in the ekklesia in a more general way, namely, “sister” (vv. 1, 15), “brethren” (vv. 14, 17, 23), “saints” (v. 2, 15), and “convert” (v. 5).
Perhaps the closest Paul gets to using discipleship language is when he refers to believers as those who are “called to be saints” (1 Cor 1:2; Rom 1:7) or “those who are the called” (1 Cor 1:24). Obviously, God is the one who calls (1 Cor 1:1; Rom 1:1; 8:30), but whereas God called him to be an apostle, God called the believers to be saints or to be part of “the fellowship of his Son, Jesus Christ, our Lord” (1 Cor 1:9). There is here a hierarchical difference not present in the Gospels, except perhaps in the distinction between the Twelve and the other disciples or the crowd. Inasmuch as he has been given a special revelation that made him an apostle to the Gentiles, Paul distances himself from the rest of the believers. It is clear that, even though there are other apostles (cf. Rom 16:7; 1 Cor 4:9; 9:5; 12:28; 15:7, 9; Gal 1:17, 19), there is only one apostle to the Gentiles, Paul himself.
The expression “apostle” may of itself have a hierarchical connotation not conveyed by the term “disciple.” Paul may have wanted to use it precisely because of that. In other words, Paul may have been intentionally hierarchical, reproducing in his letters a system of dominance and obedience that replaced the Roman kyrios with Jesus the kyrios.65 In the Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, W. Bauer says that “apostle” was used in classical Greek and later writings for a naval expedition and its commander, or for a ship ready for departure, and that in isolated cases, it meant ambassador, delegate, and messenger.66 This last meaning is the primary usage of the term in the NT, where it is applied primarily to “a group of highly honored believers, who had a special function.”67 Paul, as a ship ready to depart in search of new regions to colonize, or new cities in which to sell merchandise, understood himself as the apostle to the Gentiles, God’s messenger of good news—the gospel, but not any gospel, rather Paul’s version of the gospel (cf. Rom 2:16; 16:25)—to the world. Yes, “apostle” is the term he needed to use, not “disciple,” which conveys the idea of pupil and apprentice.68 Even though, according to Luke, Paul the Pharisee was a disciple of Gamaliel (Acts 22:3), Paul the missionary to the Gentiles received the gospel from no one. He received it from God, through a direct revelation.
