Now the names, &c.— In the catalogue of the apostles, Simon and Andrew, the sons of Jonah, are named first; not because they were greater in dignity than their brethren of the apostolical college, but because they had become Christ's disciples before them. With respect to Andrew, this is plain from John 1:40-41.; and as for Peter, he may have been the second disciple, not withstanding it was another person who accompanied Andrew when he first conversed with Jesus. That person is supposed to have been John, the son of Zebedee; and the author of the Gospel, because he is spoken of in the manner in which John usually speaks of himself. But whoever he was, Peter may have been a disciple before him, because it by no means follows from Andrew's being convinced, that his companion was convinced also. The foundation of his faith may have been laid at that meeting, though he did not acknowledge Christ's mission till afterwards. Now, as some one of his disciples was to have the first place in the catalogue, the earliness of Peter's faith might be a reason for conferring that honour on him. But he takes place even of his brother Andrew, who was converted before him, perhaps because propriety called for it, he being, as is generally believed, his elder brother. In like manner, James the son of Zebedee, being elder than John his brother, is mentioned before him, though it is probable he was the younger disciple. In the catalogue of apostles, Simon, the brother of Andrew, is distinguished from the other Simon by the surname of Peter, which had been conferred on him when he first became acquainted with Jesus at Jordan. The reason of the name, however, was not assigned till long after that, viz. when Simon declared his faith inJesus as the Messiah, Matthew 16:17-18 for it was then that Jesus told him he was called Cephas, and Peter (which by interpretation is a rock), on account of the fortitude wherewith he was to preach the gospel. Simon and Andrew were originally fishermen, and inhabitants of Bethsaida, a town situated on the north shore of the lake of Gennesareth; but after Peter was married, he and his brother settled in Capernaum, perhaps because his wife lived there. Before they became acquainted with Christ, they were disciples of the Baptist, who pointed him out to them as the Messiah. Andrew has left no writings, for which reason we are at a loss to judge of his literary endowments; but Peter was the author of the two epistles which bear his name.
James and John, the sons of Zebedee, were also fishermen; they dwelt in Capernaum, and seem to have been in rather better circumstances than Peter and Andrew; for the Gospel speaks of their having hired servants to assist them in their business. John is thought to have been the youngest of all the apostles; yet he was old enough to have been a follower of John the Baptist before he came to Christ. On this, or on some other occasion, James and John, the sons of Zebedee, obtained the surname of Boanerges, that is to say, the sons of thunder; perhaps because of the natural vehemency and impetuosity of their tempers. Accordingly their spirit shewed itself in the desire they expressed to have the Samaritans destroyed by fire from heaven, because they refused to lodge Jesus in his way to Jerusalem. It appeared also in their ambition to become the great officers of state in their Master's kingdom, which they supposed would be a secular one. Besides, John's writings shew that he was a man of a very affectionate turn of mind. This affectionate turn of his mind gave him a singular fitness for friendship, in which he was not only peculiarly amiable, but peculiarly privileged, as it rendered him the object of Christ's peculiar love; a love which will do him honour to the end of the world. As for James, his being put to death by Herod is a proof that his zeal was uncommon, and that it moved him to be eminently active andbold in the work of the Gospel. Had it been otherwise, he would not have become the object either of Herod's jealousy or of his resentment. Some indeed are of opinion, that the epithet sons of thunder was not expressive of the dispositions of the two brothers, but of the force and success with which they should preach the Gospel: yet if that had been the reason of the surname, it was equally applicable to all the apostles. Philip is said to have been a native of Bethsaida, the town of Peter and Andrew. He was originally a disciple of theBaptist, but he left him, to follow Jesus, as soon as he became acquainted with him at Jordan. John 1:44. Bartholomew is supposed to have been the disciple called Nathanael, whose conversion is related, John 1:45; John 1:51. The Ancients tell us he was a native of Cana, and was skilled in the law. Matthew was a rich publican of Capernaum: he was otherwise named Levi, and left his gainful employment for the sake of Christ. He wrote the Gospel to which his name is prefixed, and was the son of one Alpheus, of whom we know nothing but the name. There is nothing said of Thomas before his conversion: however, it is conjectured that, like the rest, he was of mean extraction; and because he is mentioned among those who went a fishing, John 21:2-3 it is supposed that he was a fisherman by occupation. He obtained the surname of Didymus, probably because he was a twin, and made himself remarkable by continuing longer than his brethren to doubt of Christ's resurrection. In the college of Apostles, besides James the son of Zebedee and brother of John, Judas Iscariot who betrayed his master, and Simon surnamed Peter, we find James surnamed the Less, or Younger (see Mark 15:40.), to distinguish him from the other James, the son of Zebedee, who was elder than he: also Judas surnamed Thaddeus (Mark, iii 18.) and Lebbeus, the brother of James the Less, and Simon surnamed Zelotes. James the Less, Judas Thaddeus, and Simon Zelotes, were brothers, and sons of one Alpheus or Cleophas, who was likewise a disciple, being one of the two to whom our Lord appeared on the road to Emmaus after his resurrection. They were called Christ's brethren (Matthew 13:55.), that is, his cousins; in which sense the word is used, Leviticus 10:4. It seems their mother Mary was sister to Mary our Lord's mother; for it was no unusual thing among the Jews to have more children than one of a family called by the same name. The three apostles, therefore, who go by the name of our Lord's brethren, were really his cousins-german: James the Less and Judas Thaddeus wrote the epistles which bear their names. This James was a person of great authority among the apostles; for in the council which met at Jerusalem to decide the dispute about the necessityof circumcision, we find him, as president of the meeting, summing up the debate, and wording the decree. Simon, the cousin of our Lord, is called by Matthew and Mark the Canaanite; but from the above account of his relations it is plain, that the epithet does not express his descent, otherwise his brothers James and Judas ought to have been termed Canaanites likewise. Luke calls him Simon Zelotes, which seems to be the Greek translation of the Hebrew appellation given him by Matthew and Mark. From קנא [kena] zelotyphus fuit,—he was jealous,—comes the Chaldaic word קנן [kenen] zelotes,—a zealot. See Buxtorff on the word. Put the Greek termination to this Chaldaic word, and it becomes κανανιτης, the Canaanite: wherefore the appellation of Canaanite, given to Simon here and in Mark, and the epithet Zelotes which he bears in Luke, are as perfectly the same as Cephas and Petros, Tabitha and Dorcas. The Zealots were a particular sect or section among the Jews, who in later times, under colour of zeal for God, committed all the disorders imaginable. They pretended to imitate the zeal which Phinehas, Elijah, and the Maccabees expressed, in their manner of punishing offenders; but they acted from blind fury, or from worse principles, without regard either to the laws of God, or to the dictates of reason. Some are ofopinion, that Simon the Apostle had formerly been one of this pestilent faction; but, as there is no mention made of it till a little before the destruction of Jerusalem (Joseph. Bell. lib. iv. c. 3), we may rather suppose that the surname of Zelotes was given him on account of his uncommon zeal in matters of true piety and religion. Judas the traitor was the son of one Simon: he had the surname of Iscariot given him, to distinguish him from Judas Thaddeus, our Lord's cousin. The literal meaning of Iscariot is, a man of Cariot or Kerioth, which was a town in the tribe of Judah. Joshua 15:25. In all probability, therefore, this surname denotes the place of the traitor's nativity. Some pretend, that among the Jews no person was surnamed by theplace of his birth, but such as were illustrious on account of their station; and so would have us believe, that Judas was a person of some distinction. They think his being entrusted with the bag, or common stock purse, preferablyto all the rest, is a confirmation of this; but as the other apostles were men of mean condition, these arguments are too trivial to prove that Judas was distinguished from them in that particular.
Thus were thefoundations of the church laid in twelve illiterate Galileans, who, being at first utterly ignorant of the nature and end of their office, and destitute of the qualifications necessary to discharge the duties of it, integrity excepted, were the most unlikelypersons in the world to confound the wisdomof the wise, to baffle the power of the mighty, to overturn the many false religions which then flourished everywhere under the protection of civil government, and, in a word, to reform the universally-corrupted manners of mankind. Had human prudence been to make choice of instruments for so grand an undertaking, doubtless such as were remarkable for deep science, strong reasoning, and prevailing eloquence, would have been pitched upon; and these endowments probably would have been set off with the external advantages of wealth and power. But, lo! the wisdom of God, infinitely superior to that of men, acted quite differently in this matter: for the treasure of the Gospel was committed to earthen vessels, that the excellency of its power might in all countries be seen to be of God. Accordingly, the religion which these Galileans taught through the world, without having at all applied themselves to letters, exhibited a far juster notion of things than the Grecian or Roman philosophers were able to attain, though their lives were spent in contemplation and study. Hence, by its own intrinsic splendour, as well as by the external glory of the miracles which accompanied it, this religion shewed itself to be altogether of divine original. Besides, it was attended with a success answerable to its dignity and truth. It was received everywherewiththehighestapplause,as something which mankind had hitherto been seeking in vain; while the maxims and precepts of the philosophers never spread themselvesmuch farther than their particular schools. It was therefore with the highest wisdom that the foundations of the churchwere thus laid in the labours of a few weak illiterate fishermen: for with irresistible evidence it demonstrated that the immense fabric was at first raised, and is still sustained, not by the arm of flesh, but purely by the hand of Almighty God. See Macknight.