The 12th apostle: Matthias or Paul?

[Mr GLee]

Nope. Places or honor.
As much honor as Abraham, a friend of God (and Judas who is also a friend of Christ) will have along with King Davis, Solomon, Moses, the twelve sons of Israel/Jacob and the twelve apostles seated in the King's Court and at the Marriage Supper table when we get to glory would have.
If we are taught to emulate (follow me as I follow Christ) the men and women of God in Scripture I see no reason why that honor wouldn't carry over into eternity. Some will be given much stripes, some fewer. But don't look at it with man's eyes. All our crowns will be tossed at the feet of Christ and He WILL be the one who will receive our worship and adoration.

You see no reason .he says the things here on this corrupted earth will not be remembered forever more or ever come to mind .

What the purpose of the of image we warned of that ?

And Jerusalem is not "all nations."

It is one of all

Nope. "Christian" merely means "Christ-follower," like "Messiah-ite." Same as Reagan-ite or Jeffersonian.
Nixonian. You know. Trump-ism, ism, ism.

Can't just make up meanings of words . Words have intended meaning attached to them . God uses denomyn people know by place of resident throughout the Bible beginning in Eden the city of delight a garden city.The city from where all blessing flow from .Jerusalem the city of bread etc ,

Christ to represent the founder "ian" denotes a demonym people by place of residence . Like Thessalonians named after the half-sister of Alexander the Great, with its residents

Christin . . Literally meaning residents of the city of Christ prepared for His bride the church A more befitting name to represent the bride of all the nations

.

 

[jeremiah1five]

(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

Peter and the eleven with him were the "apostles" that the people addressed in Acts 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?





(1:14) These all with one mind were continually devoting themselves to prayer
(2:42) They were continually devoting themselves...to prayer.
(2:46) Day by day continuing with one mind

According to Acts 1:14, the first believers were continually devoting themselves to prayer 'with one mind' under the leadership of the 11 apostles. So too, did the most recent converts afterwards continually devote themselves to prayer (Acts 2:42) 'with one mind' under the leadership of the 12 apostles (which included Matthias) in Acts 2:46. By associating what took place among the apostles and other believers in both Acts 1 and Acts 2 while employing the same key words demonstrates Luke's approval of the apostleship of Matthias.

They didn't know everything.
They learned about the New Covenant and Messiah's effect on it and Judaism.
They muddled through and made decisions that were in error, such as Matthias.
One thing, the office of apostles is a spiritual office and Peter prescribes a natural or physical qualification of merely being with/witnessing Jesus' baptism and His resurrection.
But we later learn from Paul GOD BAPTIZES INTO THE BODY and the place each individual has in said body. Peter was in error to assume the prerogative of God and appoint an apostle (and baptize/place) him in the body of Christ.
Why didn't they repeat this when James was killed in Acts 12?
BECAUSE THEY LEARNED.
The Scripture is for our training and admonition. In it we see what was done wrong and what was done right and in the beginning as they muddled through the New Covenant and Messiah's effect upon it they muddled through and made mistakes until the baby Church became more mature and put away childish things.
Replacement Theology. Because of what Peter did the Gentile Church has been paying for. That's how the RCC choose their Popes.
ERROR IN THE FIRST DEGREE.

 

[jeremiah1five]

You see no reason .he says the things here on this corrupted earth will not be remembered forever more or ever come to mind .

What the purpose of the of image we warned of that ?

It is one of all


Can't just make up meanings of words . Words have intended meaning attached to them . God uses denomyn people know by place of resident throughout the Bible beginning in Eden the city of delight a garden city.The city from where all blessing flow from .Jerusalem the city of bread etc ,

Christ to represent the founder "ian" denotes a demonym people by place of residence . Like Thessalonians named after the half-sister of Alexander the Great, with its residents

Christin . . Literally meaning residents of the city of Christ prepared for His bride the church A more befitting name to represent the bride of all the nations

.

The apostles will remember Jesus and Abraham will remember his wife.
The worm dieth not.
The worm that was the serpent in the Garden for temptation occurs when one is "drawn away OF HIS OR HER OWN LUST" and enticed.
The same temptation Jesus endured. It was from within, not without.

 

[Fred]

They didn't know everything.

Nor does any Christian.

They learned about the New Covenant and Messiah's effect on it and Judaism.
They muddled through and made decisions that were in error, such as Matthias.

No proof given.
Just your assertion.

One thing, the office of apostles is a spiritual office and Peter prescribes a natural or physical qualification of merely being with/witnessing Jesus' baptism and His resurrection.
But we later learn from Paul GOD BAPTIZES INTO THE BODY and the place each individual has in said body.

Apples and oranges.
That refers to Christians being added into the Church. It doesn't refer to the role of the 12 apostles.

Peter was in error to assume the prerogative of God and appoint an apostle (and baptize/place) him in the body of Christ.

Matthias, as with the others with him, was baptized into the body as described later on in Acts 2:4.
You are very confused.

Why didn't they repeat this when James was killed in Acts 12?

No need to.
No recording of it.
The 12 were needed at the beginning of the NT Church (Acts 2:4).

BECAUSE THEY LEARNED.
The Scripture is for our training and admonition. In it we see what was done wrong and what was done right and in the beginning as they muddled through the New Covenant and Messiah's effect upon it they muddled through and made mistakes until the baby Church became more mature and put away childish things.
Replacement Theology. Because of what Peter did the Gentile Church has been paying for. That's how the RCC choose their Popes.
ERROR IN THE FIRST DEGREE.

You are still dodging the passages I already gave in support of Matthias being the 12th apostle.

 

[Mr GLee]

The apostles will remember Jesus and Abraham will remember his wife.
The worm dieth not.
The worm that was the serpent in the Garden for temptation occurs when one is "drawn away OF HIS OR HER OWN LUST" and enticed.
The same temptation Jesus endured. It was from within, not without.

Abraham the new born again name given to Abram the father of one family signified the father of many nations . Literal words have meaning that must be searched out

Many from my experience refuse to use the tools freely given needed to rightly divide. They keep thier eyes on the temporal corrupted hoping dying flesh could profit for something????

2 Corinthians 4:18King James Version18 While we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things which are seen are temporal; but the things which are not seen are eternal.
God is not a man as us ..

 

[Mr GLee]

They didn't know everything.
They learned about the New Covenant and Messiah's effect on it and Judaism.
They muddled through and made decisions that were in error, such as Matthias.
One thing, the office of apostles is a spiritual office and Peter prescribes a natural or physical qualification of merely being with/witnessing Jesus' baptism and His resurrection.
But we later learn from Paul GOD BAPTIZES INTO THE BODY and the place each individual has in said body. Peter was in error to assume the prerogative of God and appoint an apostle (and baptize/place) him in the body of Christ.
Why didn't they repeat this when James was killed in Acts 12?
BECAUSE THEY LEARNED.
The Scripture is for our training and admonition. In it we see what was done wrong and what was done right and in the beginning as they muddled through the New Covenant and Messiah's effect upon it they muddled through and made mistakes until the baby Church became more mature and put away childish things.
Replacement Theology. Because of what Peter did the Gentile Church has been paying for. That's how the RCC choose their Popes.
ERROR IN THE FIRST DEGREE.

They were in error or God set one aside to be used in parables to hide the understanding from those not born again from above .?

John 6:70 King James Version Jesus answered them, Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?

Why 12 of 13 apostles (Judas missing )a remnant of 27 listed that represent walls of the city describing the new testament bride of Christ the church. . along with 12 gates as tribes to represent the old treatment saints 13 with the tribe of Dan missing ? Coincident or plan?

What is the hidden purpose as a parable ? Why Dan and Judas?

 

[Wycliffes_Shillelagh]

Please back up your response with biblical proof.

Both are correct.

Look at the Old Testament pattern. There were originally 12 sons of Jacob, but one was removed (Joseph) and replaced with two (Ephraim & Manasseh). Israel had 13 tribes... not 12.

 

[Josheb]

Ok and what is the new name he promised to name her (Isaiah 62) it speak of the same kind of bride mankind as a new creature . What is the new name the father named her ?

Relevance to this op?

 

[Fred]

Fred, this is your opening post. Was the thread hijacked or did you get baited unawares?

I know a subject can delve off into other areas. Hopefully they are directly related to the OP.

Or are you collaborating in the undermining of what is a very worthwhile subject that can and should be discussed on its own terms?

I think in everyone of my posts I tried to stay on topic of the OP.

 

[Fred]

I am not debating the matter with any of you.

Plenty of opportunity to explain the relevance of names inscribed in the wall, corrupted tings on this earth, Christians not knowing everything, Old Testament patterns, and all the other tangential content has to do with Matthias has been provided and the posts themselves do not bring any of it back to Matthias (or the specific events of Acts 1:15-26).

The forum is not a democracy but, on this occasion, I am offering the option of a collaborative solution that complies with the forum's rules. Therefore, rather than my unilaterally going through the thread and deleting the rule-violating content (something which I am comfortable doing without any hesitancy) I am trying something different: overtly giving the participants an opportunity to honor their covenant with the forum without my handling the matter. If any one of you can tie everything broached in the last 22 posts back to the question asked in this op, "Was Matthias or Paul the correct choice by God to replace Judas as the 12th apostle?" then I'll move on. One post. Do not digress . I'm not debating the matter. Convince me, OR take responsibility for addressing the digression yourselves, OR accept the moderation. You four choose. I'll drop back in at dinner time and if there's a single post (just one) that ties together ALL the seeming digressions op-relevantly then I'll move on. In absence of such a post I'll expect to see either an overt return to the subject or another thread dedicated to the digression. Consider it an experiment (because there are a couple of other threads gone off the rails) where you guys have the opportunity to positively influence the moderation of the forum because I was inclined to start editing without regard to anyone's opinions. If it works I'll consider this possibility in the future.

If the last 22 posts are topical then it shouldn't take more than a few sentences or a short simple bullet list to tie it all together. That, in turn, will help you four (re)focus the discussion. Win-Win. If that is done, then I will delete my posts and you can proceed as if the reports received are baseless. If it's not done, then I'll start editing and deleting tou-violating content. One post that ties it all together.

Fair enough?

I was hoping people would vote and/or post a one word response with the name that they have chosen - or no names or both names.
And then add a few sentences with Scripture to back up what they believe.

 

[Josheb]

I was hoping people would vote and/or post a one word response with the name that they have chosen - or no names or both names.
And then add a few sentences with Scripture to back up what they believe.

That would make for a fairly brief set of discussions, yes?

 

[Fred]

That would make for a fairly brief set of discussions, yes?

Ok, perhaps a paragraph or so.

See my previous posts (post 14 and post 18) here about why I think Matthias was the correct choice.
A few passages coupled with a few comments.

No need to be longwinded about it.

 

[Fred]

And 35 posts later?

Some okay, some...could do better.

 

[atpollard]

I like to stir the pot. (The OP pot, that is).
I voted PAUL.

Men chose Matthias as the replacement, but Jesus chose Paul as an Apostle, personally.
(I don’t think verses are really needed, we all know where Matthias was voted in by the 11 men and where Paul met Jesus on the road to Damascus.)

 

[atpollard]

OK, some verses …

Men chose Matthias as the replacement …

• [Act 1:23-26 NASB20] 23 So they put forward two men, Joseph called Barsabbas (who was also called Justus), and Matthias. 24 And they prayed and said, "You, Lord, who know the hearts of all [people,] show which one of these two You have chosen 25 to occupy this ministry and apostleship from which Judas turned aside to go to his own place." 26 And they drew lots for them, and the lot fell to Matthias; and he was added to the eleven apostles.
• “THEY“ sure did a lot of the leg work for God.

but Jesus chose Paul as an Apostle, personally.

• [Act 9:3-22 NASB20] 3 Now as he was traveling, it happened that he was approaching Damascus, and suddenly a light from heaven flashed around him; 4 and he fell to the ground and heard a voice saying to him, "Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting Me?" 5 And he said, "Who are You, Lord?" And He [said,] "I am Jesus whom you are persecuting, 6 but get up and enter the city, and it will be told to you what you must do." 7 The men who traveled with him stood speechless, hearing the voice but seeing no one. 8 Saul got up from the ground, and though his eyes were open, he could see nothing; and leading him by the hand, they brought him into Damascus. 9 And for three days he was without sight, and neither ate nor drank. 10 Now there was a disciple in Damascus named Ananias; and the Lord said to him in a vision, "Ananias." And he said, "Here I am, Lord." 11 And the Lord [said] to him, "Get up and go to the street called Straight, and inquire at the house of Judas for a man from Tarsus named Saul, for he is praying, 12 and he has seen in a vision a man named Ananias come in and lay his hands on him, so that he might regain his sight." 13 But Ananias answered, "Lord, I have heard from many people about this man, how much harm he did to Your saints in Jerusalem; 14 and here he has authority from the chief priests to arrest all who call on Your name." 15 But the Lord said to him, "Go, for he is a chosen instrument of Mine, to bear My name before the Gentiles and kings and the sons of Israel; 16 for I will show him how much he must suffer in behalf of My name." 17 So Ananias departed and entered the house, and after laying his hands on him said, "Brother Saul, the Lord Jesus, who appeared to you on the road by which you were coming, has sent me so that you may regain your sight and be filled with the Holy Spirit." 18 And immediately [something] like [fish] scales fell from his eyes, and he regained his sight, and he got up and was baptized; 19 and he took food and was strengthened. Now for several days he was with the disciples who were in Damascus, 20 and immediately he [began] to proclaim Jesus in the synagogues, saying, "He is the Son of God." 21 All those hearing [him] continued to be amazed, and were saying, "Is this not the one who in Jerusalem destroyed those who called on this name, and had come here for the purpose of bringing them bound before the chief priests?" 22 But Saul kept increasing in strength and confounding Jews who lived in Damascus by proving that this [Jesus] is the Christ.
• “THE LORD” sure did a lot of the leg work in the choosing of Saul/Paul.

 

[Fred]

OK, some verses …

Men chose Matthias as the replacement …

• [Act 1:23-26 NASB20] 23 So they put forward two men, Joseph called Barsabbas (who was also called Justus), and Matthias. 24 And they prayed and said, "You, Lord, who know the hearts of all [people,] show which one of these two You have chosen 25 to occupy this ministry and apostleship from which Judas turned aside to go to his own place." 26 And they drew lots for them, and the lot fell to Matthias; and he was added to the eleven apostles.
• “THEY“ sure did a lot of the leg work for God.

They were continually in prayer and fellowship (Acts 1:14) and they had their minds opened by the Lord to understand the Scriptures (Luke 24:44).

https://christcentered.community.forum/threads/the-12th-apostle-matthias-or-paul.1104/#post-40704

 

[Wycliffes_Shillelagh]

[deleted]

 

[atpollard]

They were continually in prayer and fellowship (Acts 1:14) and they had their minds opened by the Lord to understand the Scriptures (Luke 24:44).

https://christcentered.community.forum/threads/the-12th-apostle-matthias-or-paul.1104/#post-40704

OK, I am completely willing to accept all of acts and Luke as “God-breathed truth” … but we should employ EXEGESIS and accept what it actually SAYS rather than EISEGESIS and accept what we want to read into it.

1. They correctly interpreted OT scripture and knew that another would need to take the place of Judas. It SAYS that.
2. GOD did not actually tell them to choose the replacement. It does not say that, does it?
3. THEY narrowed the choice down to two men, it says that. However, it does not actually say that GOD narrowed the choice down to those two men, does it?
4. It says GOD chose Matthias from the two candidates that MEN put forward for God to choose between. It does not say that plan was the plan or the will of God … only the final choice of who the lot fell to was attributed to God.
5. WHAT IF [pure EISEGESIS on my part, but at least acknowledged as such] God intended Paul to replace Judas and Jesus personally chose and “Appointed” the 13th (replacement) apostle just as Jesus personally chose and appointed the other 12 (including Judas)? Remember Jesus’ words “You did not choose me, but I chose you.”

Israel (the nation) once demanded a King, and although that was not what God desired for Israel (God was their King), God went along with the desires of the people. I see a possibility that Jesus intended Paul to replace Judas and acquiesced to the 11 Apostles desire to “choose a king” from between their two candidates. Just speculation, but based on:

• Jesus personally choosing Apostles (not drawing lots like an OT Priest)
• What Paul accomplished vs Matthias accomplished.

 

[Fred]

WHAT IF [pure EISEGESIS on my part, but at least acknowledged as such] God intended Paul to replace Judas and Jesus personally chose and “Appointed” the 13th (replacement) apostle just as Jesus personally chose and appointed the other 12 (including Judas)?

Then the Bible would have said so more clearly.

It affirms in Acts 1:26 that Matthias was numbered with the other apostles. Now if it just ended there concerning him you might have a point.
But according to Acts 2:14 he stood with Peter while he (Peter) proclaimed the gospel. And then in Acts 2:37 those to whom Peter preached to responded to him and to the "apostles" which points back to what was affirmed in Acts 2:14. Did Luke say or even hint at that during this time Mattias walked away or was not even present? No. Thus, the "apostles: in Acts 2:37 encompasses Matthias.

Remember Jesus’ words “You did not choose me, but I chose you.”

The same Greek word for "choose" is used by those in prayer asking the Lord to do so (1:24).

Israel (the nation) once demanded a King, and although that was not what God desired for Israel (God was their King), God went along with the desires of the people.

The thing is the Bible teaches that God specifically says that the people had forsaken Him in doing so (1 Samuel 8:8). These are harsh words of disapproval.
Such was not said in reference to Matthias. No, not even hinted at.

 

[atpollard]

Then the Bible would have said so more clearly.

It affirms in Acts 1:26 that Matthias was numbered with the other apostles. Now if it just ended there concerning him you might have a point.
But according to Acts 2:14 he stood with Peter while he (Peter) proclaimed the gospel. And then in Acts 2:37 those to whom Peter preached to responded to him and to the "apostles" which points back to what was affirmed in Acts 2:14. Did Luke say or even hint at that during this time Mattias walked away or was not even present? No. Thus, the "apostles: in Acts 2:37 encompasses Matthias.



The same Greek word for "choose" is used by those in prayer asking the Lord to do so (1:24).




The thing is the Bible teaches that God specifically says that the people had forsaken Him in doing so (1 Samuel 8:8). These are harsh words of disapproval.
Such was not said in reference to Matthias. No, not even hinted at.

Most of this is a defense from silence … you are extolling the virtue of what the Bible does not say about Matthias … which I already acknowledged that the Bible says almost nothing about Matthias and God seems to have even less to say about Matthias specifically (that was precisely MY point).

Returning to the OP, you should have worded it differently since you are clearly not seeking a discussion as you implied, but have already made up your mind and are seeking to debate your position. I care too little about Matthias (one way or another) to bother debating the point. Therefore, I leave you to your position with my blessings.