Was Matthias the right man for the job?

Was Matthias the right man for the job?

Matthias was an apostle chosen to fill Judas’ vacant position as one of the Twelve. Matthias’ appointment as an apostle is notable due to the fact that Jesus did not appoint him. Some find Matthias’ appointment to the office of apostle to be questionable. The argument is sometimes stated as follows:

1.      Jesus directed the apostles to wait for the Holy Spirit.

2.      Lots were cast or used in the OT to discern the will of God.

3.      The Holy Spirit now guides the believer in making decisions.  

4.      Lots were never used again in the Bible after Matthias was appointed as an Apostle.

5.      Matthias was never mentioned again in the Bible after his appointment

-          Therefore, Matthias being appointed as an apostle is questionable.

To be fair, there are a variety of formulations for this argument. The general argument is that Peter and/or the apostles were impatient or hasty in appointing Matthias as an apostle. Matthias is not mentioned later in the New Testament and this is used as further evidence that Matthias’ appointment is questionable. However, does this exegetical formulation utilize all pertinent biblical data? Does this argument rely on too many assumptions? Is there any exculpatory evidence that Matthias was rightfully appointed as an apostle? The brief arguments in this post are that Matthias’ appointment fulfilled prophecy, Matthias fulfilled the apostolic requirements for the office, Matthias received a congregational recommendation, God sovereignly chose Matthias, and Matthias was included in references with the Apostles later in the New Testament.

Prophecy:

In Acts, Luke records Peter explaining multiple times that David was a prophet (Acts 1:16, 20; 2:29-30). In Acts 1:15-20, Peter explains that David prophetically spoke about Judas betraying Jesus (Acts 1:16, 20, Ps. 69:25). Peter also explains that David prophetically spoke about filling Judas’ office (Ps. 109:8). This prophecy is one of the reasons Peter gives for filling Judas’ vacant office. This means that Peter acted in order to fulfill a prophetic call and that Matthias’ appointment as an apostle fulfilled that prophetic calling.

Fulfilled the Requirements of the Office:

Peter lays out several requirements for apostleship in Acts 1:21-22. The man chosen must have accompanied the Twelve Apostles and Jesus during Christ’s ministry (Acts 1:21). Peter adds a time restriction by stating that this man must have been with Jesus during His baptism and with John the Baptist up until His ascension (Acts 1:22). The chosen man also must have physically been a witness of the resurrected Jesus (Acts 1:22). This means that Matthias accompanied Jesus and the Twelve during Christ’s ministry.  Matthias was with Jesus throughout His public ministry, witnessing Jesus’s bodily resurrection, and His ascension. In other words, Matthias fulfilled the requirements laid out for an apostle in Acts 1:21-22.   

Congregational Recommendation:

In the historical account of the appointment of Matthias, the early church was gathered (Acts. 1:15). This gathering included the eleven disciples and the total number gathered was “about 120” (Acts 1:15). Peter gives his Scriptural reason for choosing another apostle. Next, Peter explains the requirements of this apostolic office. Afterword, this body of believers put forward two men: Joseph called Barsabbas (who was also called Justus) and Matthias (Acts 1:23). Logically, this means that the 120 believers (including the eleven remaining apostles) confirmed that Matthias met the requirements laid out by Peter and that this body of believers recommended Matthias as an apostle.

God Sovereignly Chose:

Some will point to Acts 1:4, were Luke relates that Jesus ordered the apostles “to wait for the promise of the Father” or the Holy Spirit (Acts 1:4-5; John 14:16, 26, 15:26, 16:7). The assumption is then made that Peter and the apostles were impatient and hastily went through the process of appointing Matthias. However, this takes Jesus’ command out of the context of Acts 1:4-5. Jesus commanded them “not to depart from Jerusalem” and “to wait” (Acts 1:4-5). The command here is for the apostles to not move geographically or go evangelize to all the nations until the Holy Spirit has come upon them (Acts 1:8). This is not necessarily a command to cease making ministry decisions or a call to wait before appointing Matthias as an apostle. 

Jesus in Acts 1:4-5 explains that before leaving Jerusalem, the apostles should “wait” for the Holy Spirit and it appears that some of the apostles even remained in Jerusalem after Pentecost (Acts 8:1, 14; 9:26, 15:2). This is where some would argue that the Holy Spirit prompts believers and helps them make choices or discern the will of God. This is a true statement and in Acts 13:2-4, the Holy Spirit appoints Barnabas and Saul for ministry work. This fact is then combined with the fact that in the OT, lots were cast to determine God’s will (Lev. 16:8; Jos. 18:6). The conclusion is then drawn that because lots were used to choose Matthias instead of the Holy Spirit, choosing Matthias renders his appointment questionable.

However, at the point the lot is cast the Holy Spirit had not come upon the apostles. Furthermore, Proverbs 16:33 states, “The lot is cast into the lap, but its every decision is from the Lord.” This means that God was sovereign over the lot that was cast that appointed Matthias (Acts 1:26). The point here is that Peter and those gathered did not ultimately choose Matthias. This reliance on God’s sovereignty is also the emphasis of the congregational prayer that preceded the casting of these lots. The congregation prayed, “You, Lord, know everyone’s hearts; show which of these two you have chosen to take the place in this apostolic ministry that Judas left to go where he belongs” (Acts 1:24-25). The fact that this body of believers sought God’s guidance demonstrates that this was not done in haste and that God’s direction was pursued. The lots were cast and Matthias was chosen through God’s sovereign action (Prov. 16:33). Matthias’ name also fittingly means “gift of God.” After the lot fell on Matthias, he was then “numbered” with the apostles (Acts 1:26).      

Biblical References to Matthias:

Some will then bring up the fact that Matthias is never mentioned again in the Bible and then assume that it is because his appointment was questionable. This is an argument from silence, but it must be investigated. Matthias is not mentioned directly by name in any of the other New Testament documents. However, it is important to note that the book of Acts is an historical account of the early church that mainly follows Peter and Paul. It is also important to keep in mind that most of the other New Testament documents are purpose-written letters. On the basis of this logic, one would then have to call into question other apostles are who are not mentioned later in the NT. This logic or argument puts one in a precarious position.

One must also take into account other general references to the apostles in the book of Acts. For example, on the day of Pentecost, Luke states that they were “all together” (Acts 2:1). Luke also records that “they were all filled with the Holy Spirit” and that they spoke in tongues as the “Spirit gave them utterance” (Acts 2:4). It is difficult to maintain that Matthias would somehow be excluded from these events, especially considering the ordering of events by Luke. It is safe to assume that Matthias is included in this reference in Acts 2:1-4 and that Matthias was filled with the Holy Spirit and spoke in tongues. Luke also records that “many signs and wonders” were performed consistently by the “hands of the apostles” and that they were “all together” located at Solomon’s Portico (Luke 5:12). In Acts 5:18, the apostles are arrested and in Acts 5:29 they collectively address the high priest. In Acts 6:2, the “Twelve” apostles summon the early church to choose the first seven proto-deacons. There are other general references to the apostles as a group and it would be perilous to assume that somehow Matthias is not considered in this group when they are mentioned throughout the book of Acts. The names of the "twelve apostles" are even inscribed on the foundations of the heavenly city in Revelation: "And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and on them were the twelve names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb" (Rev. 21:14).

Concluding Thoughts:

Given the biblical record it is safe to assume that Matthias was divinely appointed to the office of apostle and his appointment was not made in haste. Matthias was chosen due to a prophetic call, congregational recommendation, and God’s providence. The simplest reading of this historical account should be preferred. It is also interesting that Joseph (also called Barsabbas and Justus) is generally overlooked in this conversation. Joseph also fulfilled the apostolic requirements and was evidently a disciple of Jesus during His ministry (Acts 1:21-22). The congregation also recommended Joseph for this apostolic office (Acts 1:23). Joseph had been faithful this entire time and it is not unreasonable to believe that that he is included Luke’s description of this early congregation “breaking bread,” joining in “fellowship,” devoting themselves to the “apostles teaching,” and having “all things in common” (Acts 2:42-47). A bit of grace should be extended to Matthias and Joseph.