We know that Peter was married because Christ healed his mother-in-law. Do we know if he had children? Do we know whether any of the other apostles were married and if they had children?
Eusebius of Caesarea's Church History talks a bit about this.
He says St. Philip, at least, had 4 daughters and Sts. Peter and Paul had wives.
Clement, indeed, whose words we have just quoted, after the above-mentioned facts gives a statement, on account of those who rejected marriage, of the apostles that had wives. "Or will they," says he, "reject even the apostles? For Peter and Philip begot children; and Philip also gave his daughters in marriage. And Paul does not hesitate, in one of his epistles, to greet his wife, whom he did not take about with him, that he might not be inconvenienced in his ministry."
Regarding St. Paul (although not one of the 12):
Paul was obviously unmarried when he wrote this verse. Some interpreters believe that he had previously been married and widowed; there is no clear evidence either for or against this view, which was expressed already at the end of the second century by Clement of Alexandria.
There’s nothing that I know of in the Scriptures that indicate whether or not they did, aside from the mention of Peter’s mother-in-law. So, it seems we can’t know for sure.
However, the norm was that men would have wives and children. When things conform to the norm, it isn’t necessary to mention that. It is only notable if something goes against the norm. So, one reason to conclude that the apostles did have families was that this would have been the norm, and we have no mention of them being different from this norm.
I do understand that this is an argument from silence, but either side would need to be that way.
Another consideration is that if the marital status of the apostles had been in any way significant or important for us to know, then there would have been ample mention of it. We do know that Peter had a wife. The normal occurrence would be that they were all married and that they all had children.
Based upon Paul's comment in 1 Corinthians 9:5, it would certainly seem logical to conclude that each of the Disciples had wives that traveled with them in ministry. Certainly we cannot conclude that each one did have a wife as a traveling companion but the statement certainly would cause us to conclude that many if not most did. If that be the case, I believe we could also conclude that ministry was a family mission as a whole not just a "Dad" thing.
Do we not have the right to take along a believing wife, as do the other apostles and the brothers of the Lord and Cephas? 1 Corinthians 9:5
Comparing Acts 1:15-20, particularly vs. 20, with Psalm 109:6-20 demonstrates that Judas was married and that he had several children. The passage in Psalm 109 is not hyperbole; it is meant to be literal. Judas had a wife and several children. If Judas had children and was away from home for 3 1/2 years being trained for future ministry just like the other apostles, it seems reasonable to assume that the other apostles had children also since they were definitely married.
Matthew 17:24-27 probably takes place at the house of Peter in Capernaum (Peter, being the master of the house, would have been the one to go outside to meet the tax collector). Therefore, as the narrative in this location continues into Chapter 18, when Jesus calls a child over in v2 to serve as an illustration for His teaching, it is reasonable to infer this child (likely male though the gender of the word is neutral), is Peter's as any children the other disciples had would likely not have traveled with them.
protected by Community♦ Oct 30 '15 at 20:05
Thank you for your interest in this question.
Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site (the association bonus does not count).
Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?