A: It was not uncommon in first-century Judea and Galilee for one individual to have two names -- or, one Aramaic name, and a Greek form of the Aramaic name. Its a Gandalf=Mithrandir sort of thing. Also, some names were very common (Judas for example), and for claritys sake when repetition of the same name occurred, a secondary name or some other appellation was sometimes substituted for an individuals name.
Now lets take a look at those lists. Here they are side-by-side, with similar marks bracketing the names that are not parallel (the Z = son of Zebedee):
Matthew 10 -- Simon Peter, Andrew, James Z, John Z, Philip, Bartholomew, Thomas, Matthew, James son-of-Alphaeus, Lebbaeus a.k.a. Thaddaeus, Simon the Canaanite, and Judas Iscariot.
Mark 3 - Simon Peter, James Z, John Z, Andrew, Philip, Bartholomew, Matthew, Thomas, James son-of-Alphaeus, Thaddaeus, Simon the Zealot, and Judas Iscariot.
Luke 6, (cf. also Acts 1:13) - Simon Peter, Andrew, James Z, John Z, Philip, Bartholomew, Matthew, Thomas, James son-of-Alphaeus, Simon the Zealot, Judas son of James, and Judas Iscariot.
Via this comparison, the alleged problem is reduced to the difference between Lebbaeus also called Thaddaeus in Matthew, Thaddaeus in Mark, and Judas son of James in Luke. The resolution is easy: these are different names for the same individual.
Regarding Simon the Zealot and Simon the Canaanite, were looking at a simple Aramaic-name-and-Hellenistic-echo. Canaanite in Mark 3:18 in the KJV doesnt mean inhabitant-of-the-land-of-Canaan (which of course could describe everyone living in the Promised Land); it has a Chaldean/Syriac basis and is synonymous with Zealot.
Theres a related question which the SABs Contradiction-Chart doesnt cover (at least, not in regard to Matthew 10:2s list) which I will briefly mention: what about Nathanael, the disciple mentioned in the Gospel of John? Hes reckoned as the same individual as Bartholomew; Bartholomew being a patronymic title (Bar-Talmai, son of Tholmai).
Yours in Christ,
Waterrock




