• **Notifications**: Notifications can be dismissed by clicking on the "x" on the righthand side of the notice.
  • **New Style**: You can now change style options. Click on the paintbrush at the bottom of this page.
  • **Donations**: If the Lord leads you please consider helping with monthly costs and up keep on our Forum. Click on the Donate link In the top menu bar. Thanks
  • **New Blog section**: There is now a blog section. Check it out near the Private Debates forum or click on the Blog link in the top menu bar.

ON THE QUESTION OF MATTHIAS

jeremiah1five

BIBLICAL CHRISTIANITY
Joined
Jun 4, 2023
Messages
2,128
Reaction score
226
Points
63
Country
USA
15 And in those days Peter stood up in the midst of the disciples, and said, (the number of names together were about an hundred and twenty,)
16 Men and brethren, this scripture must needs have been fulfilled, which the Holy Ghost by the mouth of David spake before concerning Judas, which was guide to them that took Jesus.
17 For he was numbered with us, and had obtained part of this ministry.
18 Now this man purchased a field with the reward of iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out.
19 And it was known unto all the dwellers at Jerusalem; insomuch as that field is called in their proper tongue, Aceldama, that is to say, The field of blood.
20 For it is written in the book of Psalms, Let his habitation be desolate, and let no man dwell therein: and his bishoprick let another take.
21 Wherefore of these men which have companied with us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us,
22 Beginning from the baptism of John, unto that same day that he was taken up from us, must one be ordained to be a witness with us of his resurrection.
23 And they appointed two, Joseph called Barsabas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias.
24 And they prayed, and said, Thou, Lord, which knowest the hearts of all men, shew whether of these two thou hast chosen,
25 That he may take part of this ministry and apostleship, from which Judas by transgression fell, that he might go to his own place.
26 And they gave forth their lots; and the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was numbered with the eleven apostles.
Acts 1:15–26.

Acts is a historical document of approximately the first 30 years of the origin of the New Covenant Jewish Church founded by Jews this historical manuscript documents what happened during the first 30 years of the Jewish Church and does not teach doctrine, rather, as any historical document in which people, places, and events are recorded it is up to the student, in this case, a biblical student to look into these things and to hold them up to the Scripture already revealed in the Old and New Covenant Scriptures to see where the Jewish Church got it right and where they got it wrong.

First, we have the command of Christ for His disciples to return to Jerusalem from the Mount of Olives where Jesus ascended up to heaven and this command is found in Luke 24:

49 And, behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high. Lk 24:49.

Strong’s [G#2523] another (active) form for [G#2516] (kathezomai); to seat down, i.e. set (figurative appoint); intransitive to sit (down); figurative to settle (hover, dwell.)

Next is the following passage: (this is a gathering of 120 Jews)

16 Men and brethren, this scripture must needs have been fulfilled, which the Holy Ghost by the mouth of David spake before concerning Judas, which was guide to them that took Jesus.

17 For he was numbered with us, and had obtained part of this ministry.

Strong’s: [G#2674] katarithmeo from [G#2596] (kata) and [G#705] (arithmeo); to reckon among.

This is where we get the word “arithmetic.” In vs. 17 it is a compound word. I’ll come back to this later.

20 For it is written in the book of Psalms, Let his habitation be desolate, and let no man dwell therein: and his bishoprick let another take.

Specifically, Psalms 69:25 “25 Let †their habitation be desolate; And let none dwell in their tents.”

This is a prophecy of the destruction of their Temple by the Romans about 40 years later. Bad grammar and interpretation by Peter taking a prophecy meant in plural for Israel and trying to make it fit singular for Judas.

21 Wherefore of these men which have companied with us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us,
22 Beginning from the baptism of John, unto that same day that he was taken up from us, must one be ordained to be a witness with us of his resurrection.
23 And they appointed two, Joseph called Barsabas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias.

For a spiritual office Peter lays out a physical or natural qualification merely of witnessing Jesus’ baptism and resurrection. Besides this I find Peter doing what we all do when we seek God’s guidance. We offer God an “either” “or” not realizing that we don’t know God’s thoughts and His choice may be something else out of left field we never contemplated. Typical leaning on one’s own understanding.

24 And they prayed, and said, Thou, Lord, which knowest the hearts of all men, shew whether of these two thou hast chosen,
25 That he may take part of this ministry and apostleship, from which Judas by transgression fell, that he might go to his own place.

Still with the “either” “or” proposition.

Strong’s [G#651] “apostleship” apostolē from [G#649] (apostello); commission, i.e. (special) apostolate.

The word the KJV translators use is “apostleship” and it means “commission.” It derives from “apostolos” which means “sent.”

I agree Judas committed a transgression of the Law but I also see in Matthew 27:3-5 Judas understanding what his actions brought for “he saw” Jesus was “condemned” and he confessed his sin “I have betrayed innocent blood” and repented (changed his mind) and returned the money in hopes to buy back the life of Jesus. Actually, he rejected the money and threw it back at the priests in the Temple. He rejected the mammon. Now, what many who study Scripture fail to understand is what happen next. Judas recognizes his transgression that being complicit in the condemnation of an innocent man and his terrible understanding that under the Law if one is complicit in the condemnation of an innocent person, he must give life for life.

One of the religious leaders, possibly the high priest says, “What is that to us. See thou to that?” In other words, “What do we care, YOU handle it!” What these religious leaders should have done is what is prescribed in the Law, that is, death by stoning. But they tell Judas “See thou to that/YOU handle it!” He did. Judas went out and hanged himself in obedience to the Law prescribing Life for Life. Surely, it would have been better had he not been born. But God would have used someone else. So, Judas recognized his sin, he confessed his transgression, he repented and rejected the 30 pieces of silver, and went out and did the only thing left for him to do and hung himself in obedience to the Law of Moses of Life for Life. Looking back now knowing what we know about recognizing our sins before God and confessing them it is also part of salvation to repent of our sins, something Judas did as recorded in Matthew 27:3-5.

26 And they gave forth their lots; and the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was numbered with the eleven apostles.

The Urim and Thummim (Lots) were stored in a pouch, sewn into the breastplate, which was placed directly over the priest's heart. They were put in this location to be a memorial before the Lord (Exodus 28:29). The Urim and Thummim were one of the main ways God conveyed his will to Israel (the others being dreams and prophets, see 1Samuel 28:6).

So, here’s Peter. He’s not a high priest and he’s using a mystical method to discern the LORD’S will. If he’d just do what the Lord commanded and wait for the Holy Spirit of Promise this would have turned out differently. Peter had no authority to cast the Lot as this was authorized and commanded for the high priest to use.

Strong’s [G#4785] synkatapsēphizomai from [G#4862] (sun) and a compound of [G#2596] (kata) and [G#5585] (psephizo); to count down in company with, i.e. enroll among.

This is a tri-compound word. It is completely different from the Greek word “numbered” in verse 15. It is used once and only here. So, what does this mean?

The Greek word “arithmeo” is found in:

30 But the very hairs of your head are all numbered.

In Scripture Judas is described as being among the twelve “katarithmeo.” But the word in Acts 1:26 means to be “with.” Jesus saying the hairs of our head are numbered He is describing all the hairs of our head “among” each other. But the word for Matthias means “with” and is like taking a hair from someone else’s head and adding it together with the hairs on your head. Judas is described by the Holy Spirit of being among the twelve, and Matthias as being with the eleven. A very big difference.

What happened when Herod killed James in Acts 12. Who replaced James? And if the method Peter used in Acts 1:15-26 is the correct way why doesn’t the Protestant Gentile Church continue to choose their apostles in this way today? The answer is that by the time Paul and maybe Apollos came on the scene it was learned that Peter was in error as Paul, whose words Peter agrees are Scripture, says:

28 And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues.

God baptizes a person into the Body of Christ when they are born again (saved) and in doing so places them in whatever body part He’s called them to. Peter has no authority to place let alone call anyone to be an apostle. Christ builds His Church by adding, not replacing:

47 Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.
 
49 And, behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high. Lk 24:49.

Strong’s [G#2523] another (active) form for [G#2516] (kathezomai); to seat down, i.e. set (figurative appoint); intransitive to sit (down); figurative to settle (hover, dwell.)

The command had to do with not preaching the gospel until the reception of the Holy Spirit took place. It doesn't mean they had to wait and not take part in praying for the Lord to choose a new apostle.




20 For it is written in the book of Psalms, Let his habitation be desolate, and let no man dwell therein: and his bishoprick let another take.

Specifically, Psalms 69:25 “25 Let †their habitation be desolate; And let none dwell in their tents.”

This is a prophecy of the destruction of their Temple by the Romans about 40 years later.

That would then rule out Paul.



Bad grammar and interpretation by Peter taking a prophecy meant in plural for Israel and trying to make it fit singular for Judas.

21 Wherefore of these men which have companied with us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us,
22 Beginning from the The Urim and Thummim (Lots) were stored in a pouch, sewn into the breastplate, which was placed directly over

Strong’s [G#4785] synkatapsēphizomai from [G#4862] (sun) and a compound of [G#2596] (kata) and [G#5585] (psephizo); to count down in company with, i.e. enroll among.

This is a tri-compound word. It is completely different from the Greek word “numbered” in verse 15. It is used once and only here. So, what does this mean?

The Greek word “arithmeo” is found in:

30 But the very hairs of your head are all numbered.

In Scripture Judas is described as being among the twelve “katarithmeo.” But the word in Acts 1:26 means to be “with.”


Irrelevant - see my comments immediately below. You cited a grand total of zero Greek lexicons that affirm it makes any difference.


Judas is described by the Holy Spirit of being among the twelve, and Matthias as being with the eleven.

Peter was "with" the eleven in Acts 2:14 in the proclamation of the gospel.
This corresponds to Matthias being "added to the eleven apostes" in Acts 1:26.
Thus, when those preached to "said to Peter and the rest of the apostles" in Acts 2:37 Matthias was included as an apostle in equality with the other 11.

(1:26) And they drew lots for them, and the lot fell to Matthias;
and he was added to the eleven apostles.
(2:14) But Peter, taking his stand with the eleven
(2:37) Now when they heard this, they were pierced to the heart,
and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, Brethren, what shall we do?
(2:42) They were continually devoting themselves to the apostles' teaching and to fellowship,
to the breaking of bread and to prayer.
(2:43) Everyone kept feeling a sense of awe;
and many wonders and signs were taking place through the apostles.


Who replaced James?

No one.

And if the method Peter used in Acts 1:15-26 is the correct way why doesn’t the Protestant Gentile Church continue to choose their apostles in this way today?

This was a practice before the beginning of the New Covenant Church by believers whereby the will of the Lord was ascertained - see Proverbs 16:33. Since the NT Church did not begin until what was described in Acts 2:4 then the casting of lots as recorded in Acts 1:26 constituted a legitimate means to know what the will of the Lord was. With the outpouring of the Holy Spirit on Pentecost there was no need for the continuation of this practice. This is why the Bible never mentions it again.

David Peterson: It is important to observe that there are no further examples of such decision making in the NT. As those who were about to enjoy the benefits of the New Covenant, the apostles were using a practice that was sanctioned by God but belonged to the old era. It took place before Pentecost, when the Spirit was poured out in a way that signified a new kind of relationship between God and his people. From Luke's emphasis on the Spirit's role in giving wisdom, guidance, and direction, it would appear that the apostolic example on this occasion is not to be followed by Christians today.
Footnote #106: There is no basis for the claim that the apostles were wrong to select Matthias and that they should have awaited God's choice of Paul to fill the vacancy (Pillar New Testament Commentary, Acts, page 128-129).
 
Last edited:
The command had to do with not preaching the gospel until the reception of the Holy Spirit took place. It doesn't mean they had to wait and not take part in praying for the Lord to choose a new apostle.
The command had to do with NOT doing anything "official" with regard to the New Covenant UNTIL the Holy Spirit's advent. Peter, brash, impulsive Pete didn't obey.
That would then rule out Paul.
Yes, it would. Christ doesn't replace, He adds to the Church and the Body. There were the original twelve apostles - Judas included - and later Christ added to the Church and in doing so apostles, prophets, etc., were added to the Body. Epaphroditus was an apostle, an apostles' apostle to have ministered to one apostle named Saul/Paul.
Irrelevant - see my comments immediately below. You cited a grand total of zero Greek lexicons that affirm it makes any difference.
Peter was "with" the eleven in Acts 2:14 in the proclamation of the gospel.
Yes, but he was already an apostle. The word "with" signifies that the twelve were a complete number and among each other. Matthias could never be among the twelve for this number represents the twelve sons of Jacob and also is complete in their names being in the foundation of the Wall of New Jerusalem.
This corresponds to Matthias being "added to the eleven apostes" in Acts 1:26.
Thus, when those preached to "said to Peter and the rest of the apostles" in Acts 2:37 Matthias was included as an apostle in equality with the other 11.

(1:26) And they drew lots for them, and the lot fell to Matthias;
and he was added to the eleven apostles.
(2:14) But Peter, taking his stand with the eleven
(2:37) Now when they heard this, they were pierced to the heart,
and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, Brethren, what shall we do?
(2:42) They were continually devoting themselves to the apostles' teaching and to fellowship,
to the breaking of bread and to prayer.
(2:43) Everyone kept feeling a sense of awe;
and many wonders and signs were taking place through the apostles.
Christ is Boss. He is the Head. Without the Holy Spirit's guidance - even in your own life - you will make errors and mistakes. Pete should have obeyed and waited. Instead, Luke records what happened BEFORE the Head made His advent to HEAD the Church. Jesus was on the planet 40 days talking about the kingdom with His apostles. If Jesus wanted to replace, He would have done it while He was here. It makes no sense to not do this and let Pete do it and it never get done again. Why did they not replace James after Herod killed him? Because it was never the will of God and being in the New Covenant era these apostles and disciples and Jewish Christians didn't know everything but had to learn through trial and error until their access to the OT Scriptures would enlighten them and also through their prayers and keeping an "eye" on God's direction learn what to do and not to do in their lives.
And there's a reason for this. Luke is only documenting what happen in the New Covenant era's beginnings not teaching doctrine. Like any history book it only records what happen. WE read and study history to learn what was done right and what was wrong, and brother Pete was wrong. In many things. Once, Paul had to throw it in his face what Pete was doing wrong and that was being a Judaizer despite his experience with Cornelius. Peter and James held to Judaism more than we think.
This was a practice before the beginning of the New Covenant Church by believers whereby the will of the Lord was ascertained - see Proverbs 16:33. Since the NT Church did not begin until what was described in Acts 2:4 then the casting of lots as recorded in Acts 1:26 constituted a legitimate means to know what the will of the Lord was. With the outpouring of the Holy Spirit on Pentecost there was no need for the continuation of this practice. This is why the Bible never mentions it again.
The Lot was authorized for the high priest to perform in their Mosaic Covenant. Peter was ignorant of the "enduing of the Holy Spirit" until He came. THEN he was able to preach a first sermon to his Jewish brethren and hit all points of covenant and promises and prophets and their prophecy (Joel.) Before that he was an idiot.
David Peterson: It is important to observe that there are no further examples of such decision making in the NT. As those who were about to enjoy the benefits of the New Covenant, the apostles were using a practice that was sanctioned by God but belonged to the old era. It took place before Pentecost, when the Spirit was poured out in a way that signified a new kind of relationship between God and his people. From Luke's emphasis on the Spirit's role in giving wisdom, guidance, and direction, it would appear that the apostolic example on this occasion is not to be followed by Christians today.
Footnote #106: There is no basis for the claim that the apostles were wrong to select Matthias and that they should have awaited God's choice of Paul to fill the vacancy (Pillar New Testament Commentary, Acts, page 128-129).
The command was to WAIT!
Obedience is better than sacrifice and rebellion - overt or subliminal - is as witchcraft.
Peterson is another ignorant idiot.
 
The command had to do with NOT doing anything "official" with regard to the New Covenant UNTIL the Holy Spirit's advent.


No Scripture cited from you.
Typical.

Next time try not dodging this evidence with your meaningless verbosity.

Here it is again. Now deal with the evidence.

Peter was "with" the eleven in Acts 2:14 in the proclamation of the gospel.
This corresponds to Matthias being "added to the eleven apostes" in Acts 1:26.
Thus, when those preached to "said to Peter and the rest of the apostles" in Acts 2:37 Matthias was included as an apostle in equality with the other 11.

(1:26) And they drew lots for them, and the lot fell to Matthias;
and he was added to the eleven apostles.
(2:14) But Peter, taking his stand with the eleven
(2:37) Now when they heard this, they were pierced to the heart,
and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, Brethren, what shall we do?
(2:42) They were continually devoting themselves to the apostles' teaching and to fellowship,
to the breaking of bread and to prayer.
(2:43) Everyone kept feeling a sense of awe;
and many wonders and signs were taking place through the apostles.


Peterson is another ignorant idiot.

If you say so....right?
 
No Scripture cited from you.
Typical.

Next time try not dodging this evidence with your meaningless verbosity.

Here it is again. Now deal with the evidence.

Peter was "with" the eleven in Acts 2:14 in the proclamation of the gospel.
This corresponds to Matthias being "added to the eleven apostes" in Acts 1:26.
Thus, when those preached to "said to Peter and the rest of the apostles" in Acts 2:37 Matthias was included as an apostle in equality with the other 11.

(1:26) And they drew lots for them, and the lot fell to Matthias;
and he was added to the eleven apostles.
(2:14) But Peter, taking his stand with the eleven
(2:37) Now when they heard this, they were pierced to the heart,
and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, Brethren, what shall we do?
(2:42) They were continually devoting themselves to the apostles' teaching and to fellowship,
to the breaking of bread and to prayer.
(2:43) Everyone kept feeling a sense of awe;
and many wonders and signs were taking place through the apostles.




If you say so....right?
When I post I usually take it for granted the person I interact with is on the same level of knowledge as me and this is why sometimes I use commentary. I usually think they can read the paraphrase of the Word of God I post but I need to stop doing this because when I get responses like that it just shows me we are not on the same level. But that's because I come at people as equals until the distinctions show themselves.
 
the same level. But that's because I come at people as equals until the distinctions show themselves.

You are the one hiding from the passages of the Bible I quoted.

When that happens you put yourself on a "level' above what the Bible affirms.

It's obvious as to why you would avoid them.
 
You are the one hiding from the passages of the Bible I quoted.

When that happens you put yourself on a "level' above what the Bible affirms.

It's obvious as to why you would avoid them.
I'm at the correct level presently at what the Bible affirms me to be. It's people that misjudge me with bias, prejudice, and arrogance.
I am what I am.
And I know what that is.
Tell me, has God ever spoken to you?
Verbally.
 
I'm at the correct level presently at what the Bible affirms me to be.

All the while ignoring Acts 2:14 and others.


It's people that misjudge me with bias, prejudice, and arrogance.

Not misjudging you when you won't deal with several passages.

I am what I am.

No excuse as to why you avoid the evidence.

And I know what that is.


God knows better.

Tell me, has God ever spoken to you?
Verbally.

Off topic.
 
All the while ignoring Acts 2:14 and others.




Not misjudging you when you won't deal with several passages.



No excuse as to why you avoid the evidence.




God knows better.



Off topic.
The command is to WAIT for the Holy Spirit.
Peter did not wait.
He rushed headlong into error void of the Holy Spirit's leading and guidance.
You think Peter's disobedience is perfectly fine.

Luke records the history. He doesn't teach. It's up to some of us that understand this to see whether he was in the right or in the wrong.
Peter disobeyed. Everything he does from that disobedience does not have the blessing and sanction of God for God does not bless sin.
You on the other hand believe He does.
 
The command is to WAIT for the Holy Spirit.

and not to begin preaching the gospel until then.

Notice in Luke 24:47 the proclamation of the gospel is mentioned, and this connects with waiting to preach it when they were baptized with the Holy Spirit (Luke 24:49-Acts 1:5-Acts 2:4).
 
and not to begin preaching the gospel until then.

Notice in Luke 24:47 the proclamation of the gospel is mentioned, and this connects with waiting to preach it when they were baptized with the Holy Spirit (Luke 24:49-Acts 1:5-Acts 2:4).
The method to choosing anyone for any calling is found in Acts 13:1-4.
This is still the method today.
But Peter’s method was never “The Holy Ghost said” because He hadn’t arrived yet.
So, find a church that does it Peter’s way and have at it.
I KNOW better.
 
The method to choosing anyone for any calling is found in Acts 13:1-4.

That was during the New Covenant when lots are no longer needed.


Maybe this time you can see this:

(1:26) And they drew lots for them, and the lot fell to Matthias;
and he was added to the eleven apostles.
(2:14) But Peter, taking his stand with the eleven
(2:37) Now when they heard this, they were pierced to the heart,
and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, Brethren, what shall we do?
(2:42) They were continually devoting themselves to the apostles' teaching and to fellowship,
to the breaking of bread and to prayer.
(2:43) Everyone kept feeling a sense of awe;
and many wonders and signs were taking place through the apostles.
 
That was during the New Covenant when lots are no longer needed.


Maybe this time you can see this:

(1:26) And they drew lots for them, and the lot fell to Matthias;
and he was added to the eleven apostles.
(2:14) But Peter, taking his stand with the eleven
(2:37) Now when they heard this, they were pierced to the heart,
and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, Brethren, what shall we do?
(2:42) They were continually devoting themselves to the apostles' teaching and to fellowship,
to the breaking of bread and to prayer.
(2:43) Everyone kept feeling a sense of awe;
and many wonders and signs were taking place through the apostles.
I think that because the Gentile church wants to believe in replacement theology and choose their apostles in this way that it just might be the method by which the False Prophet in the end times is chosen because they sure don't want to hear anything from the Holy Spirit in the choosing of apostles.
I mean, so what if it says God calls and places in the body of Christ. Who needs God. We can cast dice and choose out our own leadership in our church.

If you want to believe in this method then go ahead and find a church that practices this method and join them. We don't need God baptizing into the body with a calling anyone He saves because we can just cast the dice and baptize individuals into the body of Christ ourselves. We don't need God. We'll just do it ourselves.
Good luck.
 
I don't need luck because I have what the Bible already teaches.
You take Lukes recording of history of the first thirty years as doctrine which is error for histories are only that: histories, and it is important to hold up events that happened in Acts against the writings of the First Covenant especially that the events and phenomenon taking place IN Israel have to do with Israel and THEIR Covenants and they have every right to interpret everything happening as part of their covenants with God.
Taking historical documentation and making them doctrine without first understanding them and whether the things that were done were right or wrong will leave any conclusion you make error.
That's the bottom line.
One group says Matthias was a replacement for brother Judas, another group says Paul replaced, and I say the same thing as Scripture: Christ doesn't replace, HE ADDS.
You two groups have at it. I'm confident Peter was disobedient, was void of the Holy Spirit's guidance, and made a completely knucklehead-Peter mistake.
 
You take Lukes recording of history of the first thirty years as doctrine which is error for histories are only that: histories,

Too bad you have such a low view of the inspiration of Scripture by Luke.
 
Too bad you have such a low view of the inspiration of Scripture by Luke.
On the contrary. I have a high view of Scripture. I believe in the inerrancy and inspiration of the Scriptures from Genesis to Revelation.
I KNOW Acts is a historical documenting the first thirty years of the New Covenant Jewish Church founded by Jews. I KNOW that Acts is recoding that history and a true student of the writings would know the First Covenant writings are purely Hebraic/Jewish writings by Jews documenting the Hebrew/Jewish history and covenants of God with Israel and they consist of their Law, their Psalms, and their Prophets. I KNOW the New Covenant writings of Peter, Matthew, Mark, James, Paul, etc., were written by Jewish Christians to and for other Jewish Christians who founded Jewish churches in Gentile lands - and Jerusalem - and that we are to study the historical writings to learn what the early Jewish Christians did and what they got right and what they got wrong and go from there to do the good and eschew the evil recorded there.
You on the other hand want to take Acts and use them outright for doctrine not discerning the Lord's body but take what happened in Acts 2 as the method for choosing apostles when it is God's prerogative as to who He calls if He chooses to call anyone at all.

I suppose we can take our American historical documents to get our doctrine during the Civil War and during Reconstruction and learn HOW to kill, maim, torture, and subjugate the black man to our benefit, or to take the historical record of the mid-twentieth century Germany to get our doctrine in HOW to persecute, kill, and maim, and decimate the Jews and this time try to reach not the murder of only 6 million but 12 million Jews.
Yes, we should be in-DOCTRIN-ATING our children to look at the historical records in their school textbooks and teach them exactly what's recorded there without any care as to differentiate what is good and what is evil.
Yes, let's do it YOUR way!
Lord have mercy!
 
You on the other hand want to take Acts and use them outright for doctrine


Sounds good to me.
Acts 2:21 corresponds to Romans 10:13.
Acts 9:27-28 with Ephesians 6:20.
Acts 9:31 with Colossians 3:22.
Acts 9:35 with 2 Corinthians 3:16.
Acts 10:36 with Romans 10:12.
Acts 10:45 with Romans 5:5
Acts 10:47 with Galatians 3:2.
Acts 21:14 with Ephesians 5:17.

Many others as well.
 
Last edited:
Here it is again. Now deal with the evidence.

Peter was "with" the eleven in Acts 2:14 in the proclamation of the gospel.
This corresponds to Matthias being "added to the eleven apostes" in Acts 1:26.
Thus, when those preached to "said to Peter and the rest of the apostles" in Acts 2:37 Matthias was included as an apostle in equality with the other 11.

(1:26) And they drew lots for them, and the lot fell to Matthias;
and he was added to the eleven apostles.
(2:14) But Peter, taking his stand with the eleven
(2:37) Now when they heard this, they were pierced to the heart,
and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, Brethren, what shall we do?
(2:42) They were continually devoting themselves to the apostles' teaching and to fellowship,
to the breaking of bread and to prayer.
(2:43) Everyone kept feeling a sense of awe;
and many wonders and signs were taking place through the apostles.
Doesn't that more acknowledge the reality than comment (one way or another) on whether the prior action was correct?

Jesus acknowledged Peter would deny Him, but that does not imply that "denying Christ" is a good thing and we should do likewise ... or even that Jesus desired Peter to deny Him. It just acknowledged the reality (just as Peter's insight from God was acknowledged as being from God ... an GOOD example compared to the BAD example ... but both alike in being "statements of fact" rather than commands to us.)

Choosing Matthias was probably the correct action, but I question whether THAT was Luke's point in Acts 2:14 (I think Luke was making another point all together).
YMMV

Revelation and the reference to 12 foundations makes questions about "Who are the 12 Apostles" significant [to whatever extent the question is significant]. If Matthias is #12, then is Paul not an Apostle in Revelations? ... [This is why I generally avoid discussions on Revelations or Daniel or Eschatology in general. I have enough on my plate in the PRESENT. ;) ]
 
Doesn't that more acknowledge the reality than comment (one way or another) on whether the prior action was correct?

I have no ideas what the above means.


Choosing Matthias was probably the correct action, but I question whether THAT was Luke's point in Acts 2:14 (I think Luke was making another point all together).


It was "a point" among others.


Revelation and the reference to 12 foundations makes questions about "Who are the 12 Apostles" significant [to whatever extent the question is significant]. If Matthias is #12, then is Paul not an Apostle in Revelations? ...


Peter Pett: The city is founded on the twelve apostles, as was the Temple which comprised the church (Ephesians 2:20). The conjunction of the twelve tribes of Israel with the twelve apostles demonstrates that we have here the true people of God of all ages. ‘The twelve apostles’ signifies the whole apostleship, it is not intended to discriminate who the twelfth apostle may be (whether Matthias or Paul).
https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/eng/pet/revelation-21.html

[This is why I generally avoid discussions on Revelations or Daniel or Eschatology in general. I have enough on my plate in the PRESENT. ;) ]
Understood.
 
Back
Top