The Twelve Apostles (2026)

Are the twelve disciples those whom we would have picked to start the greatest commission ever given to human endeavour? Would we have been prepared to invest three years’ effort into such an unusual group? In this article on the diversity of the disciples, I hope to present a positive view of the diversity God uses, along with encouragement that we are not required to all be the same.

It is obvious from creation that God demonstrates tremendous diversity. My wife and I like palm trees - but we would not want all 2,500 varieties in our garden! We can appreciate the beauty of some of the thousands of different butterflies and also wonder why there are over 33, 000 different types of fish, when most of that variety will not be seen by human beings. Some diversity may be helpful for resilience in a fallen world, but God seems to delight in variety just because He can; to give a sense of His creativity, grandeur, and beauty, and to demonstrate His ability to work in varied situations.

As human beings, we do not necessarily cope well with diversity. It can challenge our sense of security and any thoughts we may harbour that others bring us validation by being like us. God is not like that -eternally secure in His uniqueness, He says three times in Isaiah chapter 45, ‘I am the Lord, and there is none else’, vv. 5, 6, 18.

Diversity also challenges our limited cognitive capability to store and process information. God created the enormous variety of languages to accomplish His purpose of spreading people out around the planet, Gen. 11. Less than 1% of people can speak five or more languages, but there are over 7,000 languages in the world! God can listen to whatever language we use to pray, equally and fully understanding in whatever dialect we may use.

With such a God of variety, it is no surprise that the twelve disciples were not clones. We have their names listed four times.¹ In each list Peter is put first, and he is well known for his prominence among the twelve. There is a striking contrast with others (such as Thaddaeus or James the son of Alphaeus) whom we know very little about. There is also a contrast with Peter’s own brother Andrew, who, despite having brought Peter to the Lord, is not included on the occasions the Lord took just Peter, James, and John into situations. I sometimes wonder how he felt - but he just kept on doing what he was good at, bringing folk to Christ, John 6. 8, 9; 12. 20-22. Passages such as 1 Corinthians chapter 12 verses 24 to 27 make clear that God gives variation in prominence and roles that we must not confuse with importance or value.

This was true even in Peter’s life. Prominent in the first part of Acts, he brought the gospel to the first Jews and Gentiles to be converted. Then, he practically disappears from the record, as the focus shifts to Paul. Our humanity may not readily embrace change, but just as God promised that there will be natural seasons, Gen. 8. 22 - and with each He gives each a unique beauty - so there is often diversity of service in the seasons of life.

There was diversity in character and style within the twelve that God used to accomplish different ends. This is illustrated by comparing Matthew and John; the style of writing in their respective gospels is clearly distinctive, as was the audience, timing, and purpose for which they were writing.

Matthew also reminds us of how the Lord uses those with differing views on non-essentials. Simon the Zealot may have been from those who wanted independence from the occupying Romans. Matthew the tax collector was working for the Romans. An interesting mix, but they were focused on the more important work the Lord had for them. How wise to work together on things of real value rather than being embroiled in contentious discussions of no eternal consequence! While the New Testament is clear that fellowship is based on unity on important truths, getting on with people does not need to imply agreement with every detail of all they think or do. Diverse opinion on minor matters is to be expected!

It is striking how little is said about the disciples in terms of some aspects of their background. We know nothing of their appearance and little of their physical capabilities. This is a refreshing contrast to cultures where so much is made of the differences in how people look or what they are physically able to do! One disciple could run faster than another, but both could speak of the good news of the resurrection, John 20. 4.

We infer that John was relatively young based on the time of his later writings (and perhaps his athleticism in John 20!), but nothing is specifically said about their ages. We must not limit what age an individual must be for God to use today; His word is full of examples of those He used across the age spectrum.

We know nothing about any of their qualifications, and details about occupation and financial standing for only a few. These things may matter for the specific sphere where God wants an individual to serve, but their absence is not a bar to having some area of service for the Lord.

Recognizing that God works through diversity (including using those we might not!) does not imply anyone can do anything or that we abandon any sense of discernment. The apostles were those specifically called and equipped to fulfil that role. There were false apostles in the time of the New Testament and a clear warning given to avoid them, 2 Cor. 11. 12, 13. The apostles’ service was for a time and there are no such apostles today; they were solely connected with the church’s foundation, Eph. 2. 20.

Inevitably the diversity among the twelve was limited and we should note they were not the only people the Lord had as followers. There are seventy mentioned in Luke chapter 10 and 120 in Acts chapter 1. While God may single out a select group for a specific task, we know that He is willing to use, in some way, all who are available. As Mark and Luke illustrate, it was not necessary to be an apostle to be a Gospel writer.

That is especially important relative to women. While there were none in the twelve, there were many opportunities for them to be disciples in the broader sense. They worshipped Him, gave specifically to help Him, and learnt from Him.² There were women present when the eleven forsook Him and fled, implying a level of faithfulness and dedication to which the men did not attain, John 19. 25.

Looking across scripture, there are a small number of things God does not want men to do, and a small number of things God does not want women to do. This is His choice as Creator. In recognizing the value of diversity, we must resist attempts to either expand or reduce that divinely-given limitation and put our energy into the plenty that is open to us to do. Sometimes we find that there is a natural lack of diversity among disciples as we reach those in our vicinity. Philip was from Bethsaida, like Peter and Andrew, John 1. 44; James and John were fisherman also from the Galilee area. However, the Lord would challenge their stereotypes about locality in the interaction with Nathaniel, vv. 46-49, and the woman from Samaria, 4. 27. They travelled widely in their own country, into the area of Decapolis and saw how the Lord handled Greeks and Romans as well as Jews. Healthy missionary interest, wisely used travel, and positively engaging with those from different cultures can all broaden beyond our own ambit our understanding of the diversity God uses.

A consideration of diversity among the disciples needs to include Judas Iscariot, who is always placed last in the list of disciples by the inspired writers. However, it is telling that in the upper room, when the Lord said one of them would betray Him, the disciples had no idea who it would be. This shows the wonderful grace of the Lord Jesus, that in the three preceding years there had been no mistreatment or spite shown, and it would culminate in the Saviour washing Judas’ feet, just as He did the other disciples’. We inevitably come across those whose actions we feel we should speak disapprovingly of (as the Lord did regarding the betrayal), but we should distinguish that from our treatment of someone as a person. The Lord has set a high standard for us to follow; His view on the morality of another’s actions did not change the grace with which He interacted, and others could tell no difference in the way they were treated.

Practical implications

We should value fellow believers recognizing that all are precious. This is not because of any human characteristic that we may prize but because they are purchased by the blood of Christ, Acts 20. 28. God uses diversity in characters and backgrounds and does not have favourites within the church when it comes to race, social class, and other divisions that people use.

Christians should be scrupulously fair; the Lord was not unjustly preferential within the twelve and some of His strongest words of rebuke were for Peter. Bias can come into our actions for many reasons; one example is the damage done within assemblies due to favouritism towards (or against) family members. We all have levels of ‘unconscious bias’, potentially leading to imperfect decisions due to our inevitably limited life experience; humble awareness of our limitations, openness to wise counsel, and dependence on the Spirit in prayer are important for us all.

We should be open-minded regarding who God will use, including those who have recovered from failure. While some failures can impact our sphere of service, a recovered Peter was used mightily during Acts and through his Epistles, and all the disciples had fled at one point. There is diversity in failure, and we must not treat people less favourably just because they happen to fail differently from ourselves, Gal. 6. 1.

We can worship God for His brilliance in diversity. For the 100 billion stars in our milky way, and the trillions more elsewhere; He has made them all to differ in glory while calling each by name, 1 Cor 15. 41; Ps. 147. 4. Likewise, we can praise Him for His willingness and ability to work through diverse disciples today.