History of Christ's Apostles?
913803
after jesus' death and resurection the twelve disbanded and there is no historical evidence as to what happened to the others, however there is a great deal of speculation that they were probably hung or tortured by the opposion that still had issues with the Messiah
853683
Common sense would dictate that the Church of Christ, the one He personally founded for all mankind, would be the one which can show a 2,000 year history. For example, there is no mention of an "Orthodox Church" in any historical writing before the 10th Century.  No historical record of any Protestant church before the 16th Century.  But there are written historical documents by the Holy Catholic Church and about the Holy Catholic Church, by that name, dating back to bishops of the Church who knew the Apostles personally.  It's really an open and shut case.  Many people have many reasons for not wanting to accept the historical truth.  But that doesn't make it any less true.
454386
Actually, there is abundant evidence that the historical Jesus existed that is entirely apart from the records of the apostolic-era Christian community.  Much of the best evidence comes from detractors of the new Christian sect of Judaism, such as the Roman Jewish historian Flavius Josephus. \n\nIt seems clear that the historical Jesus definitely existed.  The degree to which this historical figure bears any resemblance to the very different portrayals of Jesus in different Christian traditions is a matter of personal belief.  \n\nYou may want to read books about the "historical Jesus," such as the famous classic by Massey.
877013
True, and it is what I've been saying all along. When I was a Christian, I still didn't believe in the letters of Paul. Was it not the prophets of the ancient times that brought laws and the word of G-d through revelation (ie. a burning bush, the direct voice of G-d)? Then years later, the "new" testament is revealed through letters and secondary sources written by people who weren't even there.  Another great point, thanks for the question.
690766
History lesson.  :-) During Jesus' time on earth, there were two canons of Jewish Scripture in use.  One, now called the Jamnian canon, is what is currently used by Protestants.  The other, called the Septuigant, was translated in Alexandria into Greek. The Jews at the time of Christ had disputes about which was the true canon.  This was not resolved until 90 AD, nearly 60 years after Christ's death.  At this point, the authority the Jews had over the "oracles of God (see Romans 3:2) had passed on to the newly formed Christian church.  At the same time that the Jews decided on this form of the Old Testament, they also rejected the New Testament writings that were presented as possible additions to the canon of Scripture.  \n\n\nThe canon of the New Testament was set at the Councils of Hippo and Carthage (393 and 397 AD).  Both Councils confirmed the Septuigant as the Old Testament canon.  \n\nAfter this, there was still dispute among Christians about the canon (include 1 Clement?  is Revelation really inspired?), but the canon stood until Martin Luther, when the deuterocanonicals (literally "second canon", apocrapha means "uninspired") were removed (Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Sirach, Baruch, 1 and 2 Maccabees, and parts of Daniel and Ester).  Luther also wanted to remove  Hebrews, 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, Jude, and Revelation.  \n\nI am thrilled that you have a personal relationship with Christ.  It is vital for all Christians to live as Christ want us to live.  More Catholics need that relationship. Perhaps God led you to find that Bible, and to wonder about it.  Do some looking into Catholicism, you may be suprised at what you find.  Unfortunatly many Catholics are not taught their faith, and so, despite it's intellectualism and beauty, they find God elsewhere.  Good luck.
304021
The Gospel of Judas was written many many years after the apostles lived and their associates (Timothy and Luke). Where did you get your historical research? \nGive me a break. \n\nThe gnostic gospels are from beliefs that began in the 2nd and 3rd century, which meens that the writings come from a time period more than 100 years after Jesus ministry, far later than any New Testament book. Why in the world should we believe that these later documents tell us more about events than the earlier documents? They are simply not useful for trying to understand Jesus ministry and the shape of very early Christianity. (1)\n\nThe gnostic gospels were late arrivals, which is ONE reason why church leaders rejected them ... they lacked authority since their authors were neither (a) apostles of Jesus nor (b) persons associated with apostles of Jesus... and no one knows who wrote those gnostic gospels. (2)
734017
Paul is the chosen vessel of the gentiles..................\n\notherwise...\ntoss out the new testament.............
534521
That is an interesting question.  I have always assumed Mark was one of Jesus' disciples, and he probably was, but not one of the original 12 Apostles.  Luke 6:12-16 lists The Twelve as Simon Peter, Andrew, James, John, Philip, Bartholomew, Matthew, Thomas, James son of Alphaeus, Simon the Zealot, Judas son of James, and Judas Iscariot who became the traitor.  Jesus had many followers and the crowds did follow Him.  Mark had to have had some close contact with the disciples to have been able to write first hand about the life of Jesus.  \nYou have given me something to think about and investigate.  Thank you.
1169589
They were Jews. The term Christians didn't come about until the pagans in the city of Antioch coined it as a derogatory term for those religious people who acted like they were "little Christs" which is the meaning of that term.\n\n"So Barnabas went to Tarsus to look for Saul, and when he had found him, he brought him to Antioch. For a whole year they met with the church and taught a great many people. And in Antioch the disciples were first called Christians.  Acts 11:25-26
972987
Apostles - 12, Disciples more than 12. It is not a specified number. Disciple is like a student or a learner.\n\nAll the Apostles were disciples, but not all disciples are apostles.
1026589
Let's frame this in the proper context.\nJesus was Jewish.\nHis disciples were essentially his students.\nThey all were raised on Torah and probably obeyed all 613 commandments.\n\nThe disciples:\nSimon, Andrew, James, John, Philip, Nathaniel, Matthew, Thomas, James, son of Alpheus, Simon, and Judas, son of James, and Judas Iscariot.\n\nTheir relationship:\nGo to the link and learn!
429748
The only siblings that we know much about are James and Jude, Jesus' brothers.\n\nJames eventually became the leader of the Jerusalem Church and wrote the book of James.\n\nJude went on to write the book of Jude.\n\nThere is not an indication that they followed Jesus very closely during His life.  It appears they became believers after His resurrection.\n\nBoth would be younger.
348256
Christian apostolic beliefs are that Christ's apostles still walk the earth and teach his ministries. My church is a New Apostolic church. We believe that our apostles still continue the church that Christ started with the original 12 apostles.
644388
Your question made me do some research because it truly got me thinking about the bible book of Jude. I found this paragraph from a bible encyclopedia\n\n2 But who was Jude? The opening words tell us that the letter was written by “Jude, a slave of Jesus Christ, but a brother of James, to the called ones.” Was Jude, or Judas, an apostle, since 2 of Jesus’ original 12 apostles were named Judas? (Luke 6:16) Jude does not speak of himself as an apostle, but instead he speaks of the apostles in the third person as “they,” manifestly excluding himself. (Jude 17, 18) Moreover, he calls himself “a brother of James,” evidently meaning the writer of the letter of James, who was a half brother of Jesus. (Vs. 1) As one of the “pillars” of the congregation in Jerusalem, this James was well-known, and hence Jude identifies himself with him. This makes Jude also a half brother of Jesus, and he is listed as such. (Gal. 1:19; 2:9; Matt. 13:55; Mark 6:3) However, Jude did not make capital of his fleshly relationship with Jesus, but he humbly placed the emphasis on his spiritual relationship as “a slave of Jesus Christ.”—1 Cor. 7:22; 2 Cor. 5:16; Matt. 20:27.
517378
Let me provide you two answers.  First, the question is unanswerable if you mean the apostles.  The apostles could have been great frauds, that possibility must always be admitted by a Christian.\n\nOn the other hand, lets look at some weak evidences.\n\nFirst, the faith of the apostles created the largest demographic group on Earth.  There are more people claiming memebership in a Christian Church than any single group on Earth.  For a fraud, it is very successful.  It could be profound mind control, but that is simply ignoring two millenia of writings and an extraordinary historical diversity.\n\nSecond, when the early Fathers were choosing Gospels one of the reasons they left out many of the competing books was that they provided "proof" of Jesus' resurrection.  The orthodox books, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, all have empty tombs, mixed accounts and to some extent unclear messages. (I can hear the screams now that it is clear, but you can find 46 impossible contradictions between them that if one element is true, then another Gospel must be false)  Still, that was part of the decision making.  You had faith in the Church and its proclaimation or you did not.\n\nThird, while the Church has spent two millenia finding new ways to tarnish Christ's name, it is really still proclaiming the same message as it was left.  The Catholics, Orthodox, Oriental and Coptic Churches all have maintained the apostolic succession that began in Acts 1:46.  The group of apostolic successors still lead the old Churches.  While all apostolic successors are sinners like the rest of us, it is clear from both the Gospels, Acts and the letters as well as the early letters from Christians who were ordained by the apostles, that the leadership is supposed to be in the hands of these apostolic successors.  The amazing thing about their leadership however is that it does not put them in charge, it puts us all in charge.  Their role is to make sure the message is not distorted, our role is to proclaim it and to accept correction when we are wrong.  The entirety of the apostolic message was handed on in the scriptures, in hymns, in the ancient services (which are still in use by the way), in writings and in stories.  It is available to any who wish to read, hear or sing them.  You cannot control what you widely proclaim.  Only the most naive can be controlled or the most powerless.  \n\nNow I do think there is a lot of Christians following a message that would have infuriated the early Christians and you can see that in the TV preachers especially.\n\nHas Christianity been used to influence or push the populace, absolutely, but every widely held concept has been used for that purpose.  That is the entire reason for politics.  It has nothing to do with religion or philosophy, that has to do with power.\n\nWhether it is the Tsar claiming divine right or the President of the United States claiming to act in the name of Freedom, the divine gift, it is always used by politicians.
239421
They church age was a mystery only hinted in the old testament.  John the Baptist began speaking of who and what was coming.  Jesus started building the foundation of it.  He gathered 12 disciples so the Hebrews could identify with him as they are broke up in 12 tribes.  His movement took off with his disciples particularly with Paul and his companions.  They grew to 23 more apostles and churches began to spring up in different places.\n\nThere groups that began to emulate the Christian movement, some died off early.  Most of them started writing over 200 books to rival ones wrote by Jesus' disciples and Paul.  Even though many of them were extremely fictional like one describing Jesus life as a child.  It had a funny story in it about Jesus at age 8 pushing a friend off a roof and killing him.  Everybody wanted to stone Jesus but he rose his little friend back to life and asked everyone, "what dead?"  Fairly stupid stories and books.  Some wrote that Jesus was married so forth, lots of fiction.\n\nIn 325ad a Roman emporer by the name of Constatine realized that his Roman people were going into these christian movements.  He gathered the christian emulating leaders like Gnostics and so forth and created a state run religion.  This religion was called the Roman church and later became Catholicism.  He then took the nearly 300 books wrote about Christ and Christianity and started making the official bible.  He started with the Talmud, old testament and then included known books wrote by the disciples of Jesus and Paul.  Also those Paul recognized.  The rest he discounted as fakes so there would be no controversy on new converts.  Interestingly enough in 600ad a man named Muhammed started the Islamic religion and used many passages from Jubilees and many other books Constatine threw away.  You can read these dead sea scrolls dated around 200ad wrote by Gnostics and others and passages are identical to the Quran.\n\nThere remained the pilgrim type Christian movements.  Over centuries some died out, some changed forms.  The Catholic church became very widespread in many countries.  It hosted many spin-offs and protest groups over time.
343940
Paul did meet Jesus,on the road to Damascus,and was indeed a Disciple.Next time do a little more research.