Paul over Matthias

L

legitnoob

Member
well my question is considering how much Paul did after his conversion do u think Paul was Gods choice for the 12th deciple over Matthias who was never mentioned again in the bible to my knowledge. I think the 11 were anxious and felt it needed to be filled right then but Gods plan was to place Paul in that position bc He knew Paul's determination and merritt. But that's what I think want to know what Yall think.
 
I do not believe Paul was suppose to be the 12th. Paul's ministry and message were so different (Apostle to the Gentiles). Paul was set apart for a completely different ministry.

It should probably be noted the time between the election and Paul's acceptance into church leadership was 4 years or so. 1 year before his conversion (possibly a little shorter) and 3 years learning the faith before being sent out or going to a Jerusalem council.

Probably a long time to wait to fill the "last" disciple role.
 
well to br plain it took Israel 40 years to get to the promised land so 4 years isn't too long to wait considering other storys where God had a plan .but if I'm thinking right petter was the first person to take the gospel to gentiles.
 
My beliefs are the same as Icthus. Yes, Peter was there for the conversion of the first gentile, but his mission was clearly to the Jews. The Bible says they choose a 12th disciple and nothing that comes after that event says anything to shed doubt on it being legit. Likewise there is nothing written about Paul that hints he was the 12th instead. Regardless of the time situation, there just isn't any scriptural support to say it should be Paul instead of Matthias.

You are going to need to drop some verses here if you want me to believe that the Bible got God's plan wrong when it says Matthias was the 12th.
 
Last edited:
The disciples took the vacancy left by Judas's betrayal very seriously. They prayed and searched the scriptures and God had led the disciples to adopt certain standards for Judas's replacement.

Peter continued, “This was written in the book of Psalms, where it says, ‘Let his home become desolate, with no one living in it.’ It also says, ‘Let someone else take his position.’ “So now we must choose a replacement for Judas from among the men who were with us the entire time we were traveling with the Lord Jesus—from the time he was baptized by John until the day he was taken from us. Whoever is chosen will join us as a witness of Jesus’ resurrection.” Acts 1:20-22 (NLT)

Actually, Paul (still Saul) did not meet those requirements.
 
well what I was getting at is that evidence shown is that Paul accomplished more for the cause of Christ outside of Christ himself then anyone in the new testament him and Peter are probably the reason y we have come to the knowledge of Christ. comparing to what we know about Matthias is nothing other then what is shared in acts chapter 2 I'm not saying he wasn't a man of God just not as influencal as Paul. But that's what I think.
 
I can agree with that Matthias was not as influential (from what we know), but not sure why that has anything to do with the "12".
 
well don't u think God should have chose someone of influence to take that final place in the 12. But through further thought I remember that the 12 didn't trust Paul at first and maybe God knew they wouldn't except him to be apart of the 12. so I could be completely wrong.
 
Your argument about Matthias not having much influence could be applied to the other Judas, other Simon, the other James, Andrew, Bartholomew, and Thomas. I don't think God made any mistakes when he chose the disciples - we just don't know the differences they made.

And you are right - they would never have accepted an unbelieving Pharisee, as Saul was at the time they selected a replacement.
 
I don't think the Twelve were chosen based on their influence in the first place. I seem to remember more about James and Barnabas and Timothy than I do about half the Apostles (by name anyway) in regards to what's said of them in the Bible. They were chosen because they were chosen (I love me some tautologies. Still, I would guess they were chosen because played the roles God wanted them to rather than because they were titans of the faith with massive followings; faithfulness seems more valuable to God than what we perceive to be results). God rarely does things in the way we expect, nor does he make His decisions based on our ideas of bests. Israel wanted Saul. David was the least of the sons of Jesse. Etc.

Would it make more sense for Paul to be among the Twelve? Only with respect to the expansion of the early church. He didn't meet the criteria set forth by those filling the hole left by Judas (as Abba San pointed out). And "think God should have" is turf I never want to step on. God's wisdom often seems like foolishness to us. The best we can do is stay true to biblical teaching, not our predictions of best (after all, it would have been a long time until Paul could be counted among the Twelve if they waited until he proved himself and saw the results of his work), and that's what Peter and company seemed to have done in choosing Matthias to take Judas' place.

So, I feel pretty safe saying Paul shouldn't be considered the replacement for Judas, but that's clearly no mark against him or his work.
 
Actually, it's kind of interesting that you brought this up. Just this Saturday I was told by a missionary that Matthias is credited with spreading the gospel into what is now the Ukraine, Russia, and the surrounding "Slavic" lands. He is buried in (the nation of) Georgia.

It's true that the Bible that we have is very Greek-centered, so we don't really hear about the evangelism of other places. Off the top of my head I can point out that there were churches planted in Northern Africa, in Ethiopia (Philip,) and even as far east as China during the time of the Apostles.

I don't think there's anything shameful about believing that "Matthias was a mistake" -- I'm pretty sure I've heard it taught from the pulpit more than once. But I don't think that it's true.
 
Neirai the Forgiven said:
Actually, it's kind of interesting that you brought this up. Just this Saturday I was told by a missionary that Matthias is credited with spreading the gospel into what is now the Ukraine, Russia, and the surrounding "Slavic" lands. He is buried in (the nation of) Georgia.
Click to expand...
Didn't know this. That's pretty cool.

It's true that the Bible that we have is very Greek-centered, so we don't really hear about the evangelism of other places. Off the top of my head I can point out that there were churches planted in Northern Africa, in Ethiopia (Philip,) and even as far east as China during the time of the Apostles.
Click to expand...
If memory serves correctly, Mark is associated with the church in Egypt, and Thomas is linked to India.

I don't think there's anything shameful about believing that "Matthias was a mistake" -- I'm pretty sure I've heard it taught from the pulpit more than once. But I don't think that it's true.
Click to expand...
Pretty sure one of my Bible college professors has suggested that Paul is the true twelfth Apostle, too. If I somehow implied that such an idea is a shameful one to hold, or was otherwise harsh, I apologize for that; I just don't think the idea's true.
 
Last edited:
legitnoob said:
well don't u think God should have chose someone of influence to take that final place in the 12.
Click to expand...
Who are we to tell God what to do?

Kendrik said:
Pretty sure one of my Bible college professors has suggested that Paul is the true twelfth Apostle, too. If I somehow implied that such an idea is a shameful one to hold, or was otherwise harsh, I apologize for that; I just don't think the idea's true.
Click to expand...
I think you confused the term 'Apostle' with 'Disciple'. Paul referred to himself as an Apostle of Christ many times.
 
I think you are also confusing the office of Apostle (one who traveled with, learned from and witnessed the ministry, death and resurrection of Jesus) and the spiritual gift of apostle. As the Scripture quoted by Abba San states, Mathias was selected because he fit those criteria. Paul on the other hand was blessed with the gift of apostleship carrying the Gospel into the Greek and Roman world.

This is an article from The Resurgence by Mark Driscoll in which he examines the two. http://theresurgence.com/2009/06/01/spiritual-gifts-apostles

Edit:

I missed the second page of the discussion. I was also thinking about the fact that we don't hear much in Scripture from some of the other Apostles and that tradition has it that Thomas went to India. However, I see someone beat me to it...
 
Last edited:
yeah its just something I've been thinking about as I've read and studied that in the Bible that Matthias was never mentioned again and what I was trying to ask is do u think the deciples were hasty in the calling of Matthias being the 12th not that God shouldnt of picked him, and that was all under the context of what we see in the bible concerning the 2. but Im just seeing what other people know who may have better in depth studying into it and if my assumptions were wrong. but concerning the discussion between decipleship and apostlship people can operate in both of them if u read the scripture where Paul outlines the seven fold ministry the way it reads in the scriptures if u understand hermeneutics it states that these are gift which implies with every other gift u can have more then one and operate in more then one. but yeah that's my understanding of it
 
legitnoob said:
but concerning the discussion between decipleship and apostlship people can operate in both of them if u read the scripture where Paul outlines the seven fold ministry the way it reads in the scriptures if u understand hermeneutics it states that these are gift which implies with every other gift u can have more then one and operate in more then one.
Click to expand...

This is absolutely correct.

Paul tends to call himself an apostle, and he's not considered one of the Twelve, but the Bible mentions more disciples than just the Twelve.

There are other titles used in Paul's letters (Helpmate, Elder, etc) and Paul definitely falls into those categories on top of being an Apostle.
 
I personally don't think that the disciples rushed into the decision. Scripture tells us that they prayed about it. It wasn't important how much time they took, but that they followed the leading of the spirit in making their decision.
 
lol...they would not have considered it gambling - more like a coin toss. They were trying to choose between two acceptable alternatives - a win-win situation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top