Andries Van Aarde a theology professor of the University of Pretoria has set out a case that the Twelve Disciples do not go back to Jesus but were created by the Jerusalem church (http://www.hts.org.za/index.php/HTS/art ... /1634/2926 ). There are lots of things that he states which I disagree with but I am almost convinced that his solution is the most likely.
I am not convinced that 1 Cor 15:3-11 was written by Paul. I am not convinced that the Matthew version of the Q saying was the Q version, I prefer a mixture of both Matthew and Luke.
Aarde states that Matthew and Luke have a list of the twelve disciples from Q.
Matthew (10:1-4) | Luke (6:12-16) | Mark (3:13-19) |
Simon Peter | Simon Peter | Simon Peter |
Andrew br. PS | Andrew br. PS[/u] | James bar Zebedee Boanerges |
James bar Zebedee | James | John br. J Boanerge |
John br. J | John | Andrew |
Philip | Philip | Philip |
Bartholomew | Bartholomew | Bartholomew |
Thomas | Matthew | Matthew |
Matthew | Thomas | Thomas |
James of Alphaeus | James of Alphaeus | James of Alphaeus |
Thaddacus | Simon the Zealot | Thaddacus |
Simon the Cananaean | Judas of James | Simon the Cananaean |
Judas Iscariot | Judas Iscariot | Judas Iscariot |
The list of disciples are often considered in groups of four. It seems that both Matthew and Luke had at least a list of 4. However it might have been a list of apostles as both Matthew and Luke both use the word, but Mark does not (except in a few versions). If Matthew had Judas of James then it might be likely that Q had a list of 12, but without that change the evidence is reduced and Luke might have had his own source.