Matthias

[ktn4eg]

Acts 1:15-26 talks about the selection of Matthias as a "replacement Apostle" for Judas Iscariot.

I understand that there has been some dispute about the standing of Matthias as an authentic, or true, or genuine, or legitimate Apostle due in part to the fact that his selection took place before the outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon the 120 on the day of Pentecost.

Their argument goes something on the basis that Jesus told the 11 to "tarry" (wait) in Jerusalem "until ye be endued with power from on high" (Luke 24:49). IOW, they were to take no major actions or steps until the Holy Spirit endued them--thus their selection of Matthias when they did so was, so to speak, "jumping the gun," even though it may have been done with the best intentions and in all sincerity.

Most of those that criticize this selection are of the opinion that Jesus intended for Paul to be the one to fill that vacancy, not Matthias.

What are your ideas about this?

Will it be Matthias's name that will appear on the foundations of the walls of the New Jerusalem (Rev. 21:14) or will it be that of the Apostle Paul? (Or will it be someone completely different than either of these two?)

 

[Tom Butler]

My vote goes to Matthias. I went back and read Acts 1, and it appears his selection came from two factors.

First, Peter quoted two verses from the Psalms: 69:25 and 109:8, which he cited as the scriptural basis for replacing Judas.

Psalm 69:25 May their place be deserted; let there be no one to dwell in their tents.

Psalm 109:8 May his days be few; may another take his place of leadership.

So, seems to me that Matthias' selection (in fulfillment of the prophecy) was sanctioned by God, thus entitling him to a name on one of those twelve foundations of the New Jerusalem.

 

[JesusFan]

My vote goes to Matthias. I went back and read Acts 1, and it appears his selection came from two factors.

First, Peter quoted two verses from the Psalms: 69:25 and 109:8, which he cited as the scriptural basis for replacing Judas.

So, seems to me that Matthias' selection (in fulfillment of the prophecy) was sanctioned by God, thus entitling him to a name on one of those twelve foundations of the New Jerusalem.

Would say that the Bible recorded what the Apostles did in order to select him as the replacement for judas, but really think that God chose the Apostle paul as the "real" apostle for the Church going forward!

 

[webdog]

Great topic! Surely gives one reason to ponder. I can see the argument for both sides. One point I would like to point out is the Lord hand picked the 12. The choosing of Matthias appears to be done by man using their own "proof text" to do so (they would make good bb members ). The fact there is nothing further mentioned about Matthias is puzzling, while Paul pens most of the NT.
Christ hand picked Paul. My vote goes to Paul (as if I get one )

 

[Jim1999]

I don't see the issue against Matthias. Casting lots had an OT precedent (1Sam 14:41) and the basis then was that God had already chosen the person. Matthias later appears as one of the 70 (Lk 10:1, cf, with Acts 1:21ff). Admittedly nothing more is known about him. There is nothing in scripture that says there couldn't be 13,,,or even 14 plus apostles.

Cheers,

Jim

 

[beameup]

Paul was the only "Apostle of the Gentiles" see Rom 11:13, 1 Tim 2:7, 2 Tim 1:11.
"The Twelve" were for the Jews.

 

[JesusFan]

Paul was the only "Apostle of the Gentiles" see Rom 11:13, 1 Tim 2:7, 2 Tim 1:11.
"The Twelve" were for the Jews.

Paul was the Apostle that Jesus used to teach his "other flock" the gentiles...

His Apostleship was JUST as valid as other 11, more so than mattius!

 

[webdog]

Paul was the only "Apostle of the Gentiles" see Rom 11:13, 1 Tim 2:7, 2 Tim 1:11.
"The Twelve" were for the Jews.

paul did begin with the jew first, though.

 

[DHK]

Would say that the Bible recorded what the Apostles did in order to select him as the replacement for judas, but really think that God chose the Apostle paul as the "real" apostle for the Church going forward!

I don't see the problem. God chose Matthias. Why would anyone argue against God's choice?

 

[Jerome]

Why pit them against one another?

Remember Mrs. Zebedee? Jesus was not impressed with her apostle jostle:

Matthew 20:21
Grant that these my two sons may sit, the one on thy right hand, and the other on the left, in thy kingdom.

 

[JesusFan]

I don't see the problem. God chose Matthias. Why would anyone argue against God's choice?

Think that the Bible recorded that Apostles did select mattius as the replacement, think that it also recorded that God chose paul to replace judas!

 

[DHK]

Think that the Bible recorded that Apostles did select mattius as the replacement, think that it also recorded that God chose paul to replace judas!

The Bible does not record anywhere that God chose Paul to replace Judas. Can you find Scripture to that effect? I don't think so.

 

[JesusFan]

The Bible does not record anywhere that God chose Paul to replace Judas. Can you find Scripture to that effect? I don't think so.

Which one had revelation from God directly, who recorded the full Gospel of grace, and who was the one who Jesus called as an Apostle?

Answer would be Apostle paul!

 

[DHK]

Which one had revelation from God directly, who recorded the full Gospel of grace, and who was the one who Jesus called as an Apostle?

Answer would be Apostle paul!

Moot points. Or does God choose according to works?
Here are the facts.
Judas had recently died; his office needed a replacement.
What is important to keep in consideration here is this is a fulfillment of prophecy, as you have Peter explaining the prophecy to the rest.
The apostleship had to meet two conditions: He had to have been with Jesus, and had to have seen his resurrection.
It was something that had to be done immediately. The office could not be left open or vacant. Read carefully Peter's explanation.
Everything in the process was done according to Levitical law.
They prayed. They asked God to choose for them. They cast lots, leaving the choice in God's hands. That was the OT Biblical way of asking God to do the choosing. The Lot fell upon Matthias. God, in his providence, had chosen Matthias. There could be no argument against this, and there wasn't. Everyone accepted this decision. We find no rebuke about this in the Bible; no squabble--nothing.

Concerning works--what do you find about Bartholomew? Andrew? Simon the Zealot? Thomas? and most of the others? Absolutely nothing!!
So why should it be of any surprise that we don't read anything about Matthias either? Why hold him to a higher standard to many of the other disciples who are not mentioned at all in the gospel accounts except that they were chosen? That is kind of hypocritical is it not?

Also consider that if Matthias is not the twelfth apostle, then Peter is a false prophet. This was a fulfillment of prophecy, right there and then. Peter explained how this was fulfilling prophecy. If this was a fulfillment of prophecy, and Peter is wrong, then Peter is a false prophet and some of our scripture could hardly be inspired if it is written by a false prophet.

 

[JesusFan]

Moot points. Or does God choose according to works?
Here are the facts.
Judas had recently died; his office needed a replacement.
What is important to keep in consideration here is this is a fulfillment of prophecy, as you have Peter explaining the prophecy to the rest.
The apostleship had to meet two conditions: He had to have been with Jesus, and had to have seen his resurrection.
It was something that had to be done immediately. The office could not be left open or vacant. Read carefully Peter's explanation.
Everything in the process was done according to Levitical law.
They prayed. They asked God to choose for them. They cast lots, leaving the choice in God's hands. That was the OT Biblical way of asking God to do the choosing. The Lot fell upon Matthias. God, in his providence, had chosen Matthias. There could be no argument against this, and there wasn't. Everyone accepted this decision. We find no rebuke about this in the Bible; no squabble--nothing.

Concerning works--what do you find about Bartholomew? Andrew? Simon the Zealot? Thomas? and most of the others? Absolutely nothing!!
So why should it be of any surprise that we don't read anything about Matthias either? Why hold him to a higher standard to many of the other disciples who are not mentioned at all in the gospel accounts except that they were chosen? That is kind of hypocritical is it not?

Also consider that if Matthias is not the twelfth apostle, then Peter is a false prophet. This was a fulfillment of prophecy, right there and then. Peter explained how this was fulfilling prophecy. If this was a fulfillment of prophecy, and Peter is wrong, then Peter is a false prophet and some of our scripture could hardly be inspired if it is written by a false prophet.

judas was replaced by God when he called saul of tarsus...

Didn't jesus Himself commission him as SAME rank/authority as oroginal 11? peter said so!

 

[DHK]

judas was replaced by God when he called saul of tarsus...

Didn't jesus Himself commission him as SAME rank/authority as oroginal 11? peter said so!

No, God chose Matthias. That is indisputable.
Not only was Paul an apostle, so was Barnabas, Timotheus, Sylvanus, and others. They were apostles in the generic sense of the term "apostle", "one sent with a message. Look up the word "apostle" in a concordance, and find out how many apostles there were in the Bible. You have not demonstrated that God chose Paul. But Scriptures do indicate that God chose Matthias.

 

[Jerome]

peter said so!

What are you talking about?

 

[JesusFan]

What are you talking about?

peter said that Paul was JUST same as him in Apostolic authority/position, just that he was sent to the jews, paul to the gentiles!

 

[JesusFan]

No, God chose Matthias. That is indisputable.
Not only was Paul an apostle, so was Barnabas, Timotheus, Sylvanus, and others. They were apostles in the generic sense of the term "apostle", "one sent with a message. Look up the word "apostle" in a concordance, and find out how many apostles there were in the Bible. You have not demonstrated that God chose Paul. But Scriptures do indicate that God chose Matthias.

Would say that the Apostle paul was "unique" case here, as his Apostolic authority/position/rank exactly viewed among original 11 equal to theirs, NEVER said same for rest that you listed, except foe James, Jesus half brother...

Why not him as the 12th, not mattius?

 

[kyredneck]

Has anyone else noticed this similarity between the twelve apostles and the twelve tribes of Israel?:

It could be asked concerning the tribes: Were there 12, 13, or 14 tribes of Israel?

It could be asked concerning the apostles: Were there 12, 13, or 14 apostles?

The question concerning the tribes revolves around Joseph and his two sons (the half-tribes) Manasseh and Ephraim. Which one of these is counted in the twelve?

The question concerning the apostles revolves around Judas, Matthias, and Paul. Which one of these is counted in the twelve?

Dan is called a serpent and an adder in his father's prophecy:

Dan shall be a serpent by the way, an adder in the path, that biteth the horse heels, so that his rider shall fall backward. Gen 49:17

Christ refers to Judas as a devil:

Jesus answered them, Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil? He spake of Judas Iscariot the son of Simon: for he it was that should betray him, being one of the twelve. Jn 6:70,71

Dan is not included in the tally of the tribes given in Rev 7 . Manasseh is included in the count as is Joseph. Ephraim is almost of a certain counted as one with Joseph.

MHO, Paul is the twelfth apostle.