Here’s a question for you to answer: Do you know the difference between ‘apostle’ and ‘disciple’? Most people will think to themselves, ‘Well, I guess the apostles were the 12 followers that he chose to go round with him’, but further than that, most people would not be able to explain the difference – and believe me, in Jewish culture, there is a very important difference.
Interestingly, the Gospel of Matthew, which is supposed to be the most Jewish of them all, uses the word mathetes (‘disciple’) 74 times – it even uses the phrase, ‘twelve disciples’ 3 times. However, it uses the word apostolos (‘apostle’) only once (Mt 10:2).
Paul claims the title of apostle when he begins his letter to the Colossians by introducing himself as ‘Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus’.
So what is the difference? The Greek word for ‘disciple’ presumably is intended to translate the Aramaic word talmidā. This word literally means, ‘one who is taught’, hence, ‘a disciple’, ‘pupil’, ‘student’, or more generally, a follower. A disciple of Yeshua, is therefore anyone who follows the teachings of Yeshua – someone who is willing to be taught and to learn from his teachings.
The word for ‘apostle’ is presumably meant to translate the Aramaic word shelīchā. This word literally means, ‘one who is sent out’. An apostle is therefore someone who is sent out on behalf of someone else. This word can be translated – according to context – as emissary, envoy, ambassador, or delegate. In my translations, I have used the English word ‘emissary’ to translate shelīchā – the apostles were ‘emissaries’ sent out by Yeshua.
When shelīchā (apostle) is used to describe someone sent out by a religious teacher, it has a very specific job description – one that will be an eye-opener to most people. An apostle is obligated to relay what he or she has been taught verbatim, without adding anything, and without taking anything away. An apostle is duty-bound to relay the message to others exactly as it was given to them.
Now that you know the difference, certain of Yeshua’s sayings then make sense:
‘Whoever hears you, hears me’ (Lk 10:16a)
‘Whoever welcomes you welcomes me, and whoever welcomes me welcomes the One who sent me’ (Mt 10:40)
‘whoever receives one whom I send receives me, and whoever receives me receives the One who sent me’ (Jn 13:20)
If you know the meaning of what an apostle is, the significance of all this becomes clear: Those who hear an apostle, it is as if you were hearing the Master himself speaking, since they are meant to be delivering the precise words of their Master; and if you hear the words of Yeshua, it is as if you were hearing those words directly from God, since he was a prophet, and a prophet is meant to be the mouthpiece of God, delivering God’s words without adding anything, and without taking anything away.
In other words, if you hear a genuine prophet speak, you are hearing the very words of God; and if you are listening to the words that a prophet’s emissaries speak, you are hearing the prophet himself.
Now, the question arises: was Paul an apostle? Well, ask yourself if he ever quoted the exact words of Yeshua? Well, he might have quoted the words of the ‘Jesus’ in his visions, but he never quoted the words that Yeshua spoke when he was alive. In fact, he openly states that he wasn’t interested in what Yeshua said – he dismisses what Yeshua said, and who he was when he was alive as irrelevant:
‘Even if you were once familiar with Christ while he was alive, that is not how we know him any longer’. (2Cor 5:16)
Paul never describes the events and deeds of Yeshua’s life – he is simply not interested in the human Yeshua` who lived and walked the earth; the real, historical Yeshua` of Nazareth played no part in his theology. That is why quite a few scholars think that the story of the Eucharist (which, if you think about it, is symbolic cannibalism) originated with Paul.
He only talks about Yeshua’s death – and even then, he only mentions the fact that he was crucified, buried and resurrected (after all, that’s all he’s interested in). He never talks about any of the events surrounding the crucifixion or what led up to it – not even that Yeshua was laid in a tomb.
He wasn’t even interested in what the actual apostles had to say – he dismisses them as being of no account, and that they contributed nothing to his message (Gal 2:6). He had no interest in checking his beliefs or facts with them.
What this means is that Paullist theology is precisely that – from Paul; it was not from the apostles, not from Yeshua, and not from God.
Followers / disciples of Yeshua pay attention to what Yeshua actually said, and strive to follow his ethics and values. Apostles deliver the message of their teacher exactly as it was given to them – adding nothing, and taking nothing away.