
A myth of sorts has grown up around the idea that Jesus chose poor, uneducated fishermen to be his apostles. This idea is partly derived from Acts 4:13;
“Observing the boldness of Peter and John and perceiving them to be uneducated, ordinary men, they were amazed, and they recognized them as the companions of Jesus.”
These men were not generally aristocrats or trained scribes, but disciples of Jesus. The Greek agrammatoi can literally mean “without letters” or illiterate. In a religious context it probably has a more limited meaning of ‘not trained in the law’ (cf. John 7:15). In other words one not formally trained as a scribe. The Greek idiĆtai literally means a private person, or an ordinary person as opposed to an expert.
In the ancient world eloquence or boldness of speech was associated with education or training in rhetoric. Since Peter and John are clearly untrained in these fields the boldness of their speech astonishes the Temple leaders. The Jewish leaders, “were amazed, and they recognized them as companions of Jesus” (Acts 2:13).
The ‘ordinary’ nature of these Apostles must not be exaggerated. M. Wilkins believes that "James and John" were from a family of some wealth and influence, based on the information we have about their fishing business (cf. Mk 1:19).[1] Peter ran a fishing business with his brother Andrew and their partners, James and John (Mk 1:16-20; Luke 5:10)[2] He seems also to have owned a house with his brother Andrew (Mk 1:29). Mark’s text suggest that the house was not far from the synagogue in Capernaum (compare Mk 1:21 with 1:29).
Luke’s comment in Acts 4:13 likely means that Peter, Andrew, James and John were merchants and not theologians by trade and of course they had no credentials as Scribes or Pharisees. Acts 4:13 could also have betrayed a prejudice against their Galilean accents or even against their very social class as "the newly wealthy" as opposed to the older aristocracy of the Sadducees. There is no indication here of them being poorly educated in general, semi-illiterate, or just plain dull. This does not fit their occupation or background, or the biblical record of their probable use of Greek.[3]
Carsten Thiede comments, “an active knowledge of Greek would have been obligatory for people like Peter and his co-workers, Andrew, James and John (Mk 1:16; Lk 5:10), who were involved in the fishing industry and trade. They would have heard Peter speaking Greek from childhood days, and refined their linguistic abilities soon as they had chosen their trade. The Hellenistic element in their immediate surroundings is obvious even from their names.”[4] Peter Davids notes that there was a growing group of wealthy merchants in first-century Palestine who had not yet joined the land owning aristocracy, and who did not have priestly or Herodian political connections. This group constituted as new addition to the wealth upper class. There was also "a small middle class of skilled artisans and land-owning medium sized farmers and merchants."[5]
Notes:
[1] Dictionary of Christ and the Gospels ed. Joel B. Green, Scot McKight, I. Howard Marshall (Downers Grove: Intervarsity Press, 1992) p. 179. If we identify the Apostle John as the beloved disciple (John 18:15) then we read the beloved disciple was "well known to the High Priest" signifying some upper class connections.
[2]Ibid. p. 179. Are we to understand that James and John are also originally from Bethesda (cf. Mk 1:20)?
[3] Speaking to the Syrian Phoenician woman (Mk 7:26), a conversation with Pilate without an interpreter (Mk 15:2-5), the presence of Greek speaking Jews among the disciples (Acts 6:1), the meeting with Cornelius the Centurion (Acts 10:25-27).
[4] Carsten P. Thiede, Simon Peter: From Galilee to Rome (Academie Books, 1988) p. 20-21.
[5] Dictionary of Christ and the Gospels. p. 702.


The classic example would be the inspired speech of Balaam in Numbers 23-24. Balaam was supposed to utter a prophetic curse against Israel on behalf of Balak, King of Moab, but under the inspiration of the Spirit he utters prophetic words of blessing instead. The Jewish historian Josephus comments on this passage that Balaam was possessed by the Spirit of God and that the Spirit “gives utterance to such language and words as it will, and of which are unconscious” (Josephus, Antiquities, 4.119). Finally, Turner points to the ‘Spirit of prophecy’ as “invasively inspired charismatic praise or worship.” This might be analogous to the experiences of the bands of prophets in 1 Samuel 10, and 19. The Aramaic Targum to 1 Samuel 10:6 reads; “And the spirit of prophecy from before the Lord will reside upon you, and you will sing praise with them, and you will be changed into another man. Later rabbinic tradition linked this type of inspiration to the inspired Song of Moses in Exodus 14-15.
Moses, in the book of Numbers, expresses a desire for all God’s people, “If only all the people of the LORD were prophets! If only the LORD would bestow his spirit on them!” (Numbers 11:29)
Recently Cardinal George commented, “The Church at worship is the context for interpreting the text of Scripture. It is the living community of faith that gives the texts their proper understanding by relating them to the realities of faith through the tradition that binds us to Christ.” The call to witness in the power of the Spirit must be integrally connected to the apostolic Church.