The English translation was made by Claude (an AI model from Anthropic) and has not been reviewed by a human translator. Qur’anic verses are translated by the model, not taken from a published translation. The views expressed in the book are the author’s.

The disciples and the apostles

102 Report a typo

The disciples and the apostles

We have given this question a separate discussion because examining it differs from examining the corresponding question in Judaism. While the religious texts of all three religions accept that messengers and prophets followed one another after Moses (peace be upon him), the existence of messengers and prophets after Jesus (peace be upon him) is denied by the Jews, who do not recognise the mission of Jesus (peace be upon him), let alone disciples or apostles after him. Likewise, the prevailing belief among Muslims is that no messenger or prophet came after Jesus (peace be upon him) until the Seal of the Messengers, Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him). The claim that prophethood and revelation continued among the followers of Jesus (peace be upon him) is therefore something that Jews and Muslims agree in denying. Nor does it rest on any evidence worth considering. This question thus belongs to the domain of nihla (a claim or doctrine put forward by human beings) and assertion, even though Christians regard it as belonging to the domain of milla (religion as God revealed it) and faith.

The disciples

They are the companions of Jesus (peace be upon him): the first to believe in him, to become his pupils and to help him in his mission. The Qur'an and the Gospels agree on this, except that the Qur'an does not name or count them, whereas the Gospels take care to give their names and number, though they differ among themselves on this. They also differ about the disciples' mission, to which the Qur'an does not refer: while Mark states that Christ sent them out into the world, Matthew states that Christ forbade them to go into foreign lands. We shall give their names on the basis of Matthew's account, since he alone lists them in a separate passage and since his is the first Gospel in the usual order, bearing in mind the differences we have pointed out. Luke, for example, omits "Lebbaeus" and gives in his place another name not mentioned by Matthew, "Judas the brother of James"; and John alone, among the Gospels, mentions two others, named "Nathanael and Philip", and so on.

Matthew says:

"Then he (that is, Christ, peace be upon him) called his twelve disciples and gave them authority over unclean spirits, to cast them out and to heal every disease and every infirmity.

Now the names of the twelve apostles are these: Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother; James the son of Zebedee,

103 Report a typo

and John his brother; Philip and Bartholomew; Thomas and Matthew the tax collector; James the son of Alphaeus, and Lebbaeus, surnamed Thaddaeus; Simon the Cananaean, and Judas Iscariot, who betrayed him." (37)

The apostles

There are the seventy apostles whom Christ is said to have sent out to teach Christianity. And there are the hundred and twenty whom Peter addressed in a speech, after which they were distinguished by the Holy Spirit and went out to call people to Christianity. None of these is mentioned in the Qur'an.

Ibn Hazm, in his book Al-Fasl fi al-Milal (The Decisive Treatise on the Religions), refuses to accept that these are the disciples of Jesus of whom the Qur'an speaks, and he grounds his view in the corruption of their beliefs about Christ. He says: "Let every Muslim know that these whom the Christians name, and claim were disciples of Christ (peace be upon him), such as Peter and Matthew, were never believers at all, let alone disciples. Rather they were liars who made light of God Most High: either they affirmed the divinity of Christ (peace be upon him), believed it and went to extremes about him, as the Saba'iyya and the other extremist sects went to extremes about Ali (may God be pleased with him); or they were planted by the Jews, as the Jews themselves claim, to corrupt the religion of the followers of Christ (peace be upon him) and lead them astray. As for the disciples whom God praised, they are truly the friends of God ... and we do not know their names, for God Most High has not named them for us" (38).

Ibn Hazm's denial, though it has some basis, does not rest on strong grounds, since these Gospels may have been falsely attributed to the disciples, or alteration may have overtaken them after their time. Indeed, holding that the names are authentic while their sayings were altered is the easier position by the measure of scholarly criticism, since names are less prone to alteration than the sayings attributed to them, being easy to remember and to hand down by widespread transmission. A firm judgement here is therefore left to scholarly investigation of these questions, and that investigation has not yet reached any decisive conclusion on this matter.

(37) The Gospel of Matthew, chapter 10.

(38) [Vol.] 3, pp. 38-39.