Question: 

In your first Peter lesson #2, you talk about the "12" apostles/disciples - there were actually, 13, even discounting Judas Iscariot; Paul would make twelve, and Matthias, Acts chapter 1, being the thirteenth.

Response: 

On the issue of the "13" disciples, it is true that Peter and company "elected" Matthias to replace Judas, but not everything recorded in the Bible that individuals do is to be taken as ordained of God (obviously - consider King Saul et al.). Peter made his share of mistakes ("don't wash my feet", "wash my whole body", etc. etc.). Everywhere in scripture that God makes clear His own feelings about the apostles, there are 12 (as in the 12 gates of Rev.21:14). Whose names are on the gates? If we are to imagine that one of them will have the name "Matthias", then who will be left out (certainly not Paul, the last but also the greatest of the apostles)? Remember that the election of Matthias was held before Pentecost, after which Peter (and his fellows) are suddenly much more effective for God (as one would expect with the coming of the Holy Spirit). Notice too that to "elect" Matthias, they turn to the Old Testament device of casting lots, something Jesus never did and something that is never authorized in the New Testament (or practiced elsewhere ever again). Notice that God did not communicate to Peter the need to get a new number 12 (although Peter did receive direct revelation when it was time to bring the gospel to the gentiles); and notice that when God decided to choose number 12, our Lord Jesus Christ Himself appeared to Paul in a very miraculous way that left no doubt as to God's call, God's "election" of Paul as number 12. Matthias was no doubt a fine believer, but he was no apostle - except in the eyes of men (and erroneously so). Perhaps it would be more helpful to say about the apostles that "God never had more than 12". Finally, in the Greek text of Acts 1:26, Luke hints that the election, while an understandable thing for these men to do in the circumstances, was not divinely sanctioned. He says of the election of Matthias that he was "voted down along with the eleven" (the verb synkatapsephizo: sugkatayhfizw). The base verb means to "vote down" i.e., defeat, or, more often, "to condemn". And this word itself only occurs one other place in all of Greek literature (Plutarch) where it means "join in condemnation"; here we also have a passive voice so on that model it should mean "be jointly condemned with". There may be doubt on the part of some scholars about the precise meaning of this verb, but according to all linguistic convention it should at the very least have a negative connotation - something that only makes sense if we see Luke here as being careful not to endorse the election of Matthias. This is something that doesn't even hit the radar screen in the English versions, but in the Greek it hits one squarely between the eyes.

This is an important issue, because much that men have done since in the name of "mother Church" and tried to foist upon God has, in truth, been of fleshly origin and no part of the divine plan. The wrong-headed election of a twelfth apostle (something that in truth could only occur by God’s will, and through Jesus’ choice - as with the others: Lk.6:12-16; Acts 9:15) was the first in a regrettably long series of well-meaning substitutions of human for divine will in the administration of the Church, a trend which unfortunately continues to the present day. The crucial lesson to learn from Matthias is clear: just because human beings, even those in authority within a church, take it upon themselves to say that something is God’s will does not necessarily make it so.

Yours in Jesus Christ,

Bob Luginbill

Ichthys Home