Steven Carr

One thing I see claimed repeatedly is that Jesus chose 12 disciples because there were 12 tribes of Israel.

As Jesus was a major prophet, and there were 12 minor prophets, why is there not just as much evidence (ie none) that the 12 disciples represented the 12 minor prophets as that they represented the 12 tribes of Israel?

What methodology can be used to address this question?

I have just made up this symbolism. Has Biblical Studies been so successful an academic discipline that it now has a methodology to refute made-up claims?

Ben C Smith

That claim is usually based on Matthew 19.28 (refer also to Luke 22.30), in which the twelve disciples are to sit on twelve thrones to judge the twelve tribes of Israel. Is there anything like this for the twelve prophets?

Ben.

Malachi151

I don't see this as a real issue. There are 12 disciples in the Gospels because the author of Mark invented 12 disciples.

The author of Mark invented 12 disciples because 12 was simply a commonly used number in Jewish lore.

See: http://www.biblegateway.com/keyword/...=all&bookset=1


I don't think you can narrow it down to being "because there were 12 tribes" or "because there were 12 prophets", these things are circular. In all likelihood there were "12 prophets" because there were "12 tribes". (Of course in reality there probably never was 12 tribes or 12 prophets)

I don't think that any 1st century Jew had any real concept of distinctions between these things.

Certainly, I would think, passages such as these would have had some influence:

mg01

Another one is there are also 12 judges listed in the book of Judges.

Ray Moscow

Yes, it's midrash -- and the zodiac.

Steven Carr

So how does that mean that the 12 disciples symbolise 12 tribes, rather than the 12 disciples judge the 12 tribes?

mg01

Some other interesting searches to do along that same line that I've done before are seven, forty, seventy, and the terms "third day" and "three days". It's interesting to see the statistical usage results of each, and to note in each case there is a special symbolic association. Obviously seven is the most common number in the OT. Miraculous things never happen after two or four days, always three.

The explanations I frequently see:
- 3 days between waning and waxing crecent moon
- 7 is from the 5 visible planets + sun and moon
- 12 from the zodiac and/or 12 lunar cycles per solar (with an occasional 13, hence it's unluckiness)
- 40 is an idiom that just means a lot, or more than you can count, usually with respect to time
- 70 is an idiom for a large group (or family), an amplification of 7

I have a friend from Lebanon who uses the expression, "...there's 700 of them..." refering to a large group. I caught on to it and he confirmed that's where it came from and has grown another zero.

Ben C Smith

Your original statement:

One tribe per disciple. Of course.

Is there anything that lines up one minor prophet per disciple?

Ben.

neilgodfrey

As much as I hate to stand on the other side of your wit, Steven, Mark did give his readers grounds to associate the 12 disciples with the 12 tribes.

Just after the Pharisees plotted with the Herodians to kill Jesus, he fled with his disciples to the sea, and a multitudes from various other places joined them, and he crosses the sea with his disciples, and then ascends a mountain where he appoints his twelve to be especially "with him".

It's pretty hard to avoid the associations with the Exodus -- the plot by Pharoah against Moses and Israel, Moses leading the tribes to the sea, a mixed multitude joining them, crossing the sea with the tribes, ascending the mountain where tribes are appointed as God's chosen.

Looks to many like the author was winking and nudging like a Parkinson sufferer to get his readers to make the link.

mountainman

The 12 constellations of the Zodiac.
Constantine bound the sky in the bible.
He chained Easter to the vernal equinox 325 CE.

But what I dont understand is the author of
the Acts of Peter and the Twelve Apostles
(NHC 6.1) where neither the number of
apostles in the title (Peter + 12 = 13) nor
the number of apostles in the text
("We were eleven apostles") agrees with
the canonical crew of 12.

Deconstructive methodology on TAOPATTA
shows it to be a parody, and thus dates
the text to anti-Constantian polemic, if
not by its C14 assessment of 348 CE.



Best wishes,


Pete Brown