Who was Matthias in the Bible?

Matthias — the apostle elected to fill the place of the traitor Judas. He was not an apostle of the first election — immediately called and chosen by the Lord Himself. It is more than probable that he was one of the seventy disciples, and had been a constant attendant upon the Lord Jesus during the whole course of His ministry. This was a necessary qualification, as declared by Peter, of one who was to be a witness of the resurrection. So far as we know, the name of Matthias occurs in no other place in the New Testament.

Peter therefore suggested to the assembled company that the one hundred and ninth Psalm shed light on the situation, and afforded guidance for them in the present circumstances. All agreeing, they prepared to carry out the injunction of the Psalm by nominating two, one of whom was to fill the traitor's place, and with the Eleven bear witness to the truth of the Lord's resurrection. Nominating two, we have said; not meaning by their own will to fill up the vacancy; but discerning that two of the disciples seemed fitted for that office, they put them forward as equally qualified as far as man could judge. Prayer then was offered. Lots were cast, to learn which of the two the Lord had chosen. On Matthias the lot fell. He was therefore numbered with the eleven Apostles. Henceforth there were twelve (Acts 1:26, 2:14, 6:2), all of whom had known the Lord before His death, and could witness of His resurrection. It is evident that Paul, called subsequently to the apostolate, could never have answered to that which Peter declared was a requisite on this occasion. The twelfth Apostle he was not; nor was Barnabas either. They could neither of them have been that.

On one of those days of prayer Peter rose up and addressed the brethren concerning the vacancy created by the defection and suicide of Judas (Acts 1:15-26). The Lord before His departure had "opened their understanding that they might understand the Scriptures." Accordingly Peter quoted two verses from the book of Psalms (Ps. 69:25; Ps. 109:8), both having reference to the betrayer. Since Psalm 109:8 said "his office let another take," our apostle urged that one from amongst those who had companied with them "all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out amongst" them should be formally added to their number as a witness with them of His resurrection. Two persons answering to these qualifications were selected — Joseph Barsabas and Matthias. They then gave themselves to prayer, after which they gave forth their lots, that the departed Lord might in this way signify which of the two He had chosen. "And the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was numbered with the eleven apostles."

Perhaps no act has been so seriously misunderstood as this, especially amongst Protestant Nonconformists. It is supposed that scriptural warrant is here found for the election of some to the ministerial office. The fact seems to have been overlooked that the incident occurred before Christianity commenced at all. Christianity dates not from the birth of Christ, but from the coming of the Holy Spirit. Matthias was thus chosen in connection with the Jewish order of things, for of the Church of God neither Peter nor his companions had the most distant idea at that time. The truth concerning the Church remained a mystery (i.e., a secret) hidden in God until Paul was called by the Lord Jesus some years later (Eph. 3:3-6). The ten days that intervened between the ascension of Christ and the coming of the Holy Spirit were thus a kind of interregnum in the spiritual history of the disciples. The one divine Person had gone and the Other had not yet come. Nothing that savours of popular election to the ministerial office can be discovered in the Scripture records of the early Church. When the distribution of money was in question, the body of the believers were authorised to choose their almoners (Acts 6:3; 2 Cor. 8:19); when the ministry of the Word was in view, they had no voice whatever. Why this difference? Because the money was their gift, while the ministry of the Word of God is the gift of the Lord alone. It is undeniable that Paul gloried in the fact that man was neither the source of his commission nor the channel by means of which he received it (Gal. 1:1).

It appears that, although Peter was not directly led of the Holy Ghost, the Spirit put His seal on that which was done in accordance with the word in the Old Testament understood by the apostle. We have before seen that Christ, after His resurrection, opened the understanding of His disciples that they might understand the scriptures. They now act, not having received the Holy Ghost, according to a Jewish principle. They present the lot to the Lord, that He may decide. Nevertheless the lot was not all, nor was it drawn without making a distinction. Apostolic authority flowed from the nomination of Christ Himself. Intelligence of the scriptures makes them understand that which ought to be. The object which the Lord had assigned to their service narrowed the choice to the little circle of those who could fulfil that object. Their history made them capable, as Jesus had said, of being His witnesses, because they had been with Him from the beginning, and could now testify that this same Jesus, whom the Jews had rejected and crucified, was indeed risen from among the dead.

Apostolic authority is exercised in Jerusalem on the Jewish principle, before the gift of the Holy Ghost. In this there was neither research nor the exercise of the human mind. "His bishopric let another take" guided their conduct; the capacity to testify of Jesus in His life on earth, and now of His resurrection and ascension, decided on the needed qualifications; the lot of Jehovah determined the individual who was to take Judas' place. Two are chosen, according to these needful qualifications, and the lot falls upon Matthias, who is numbered with the eleven apostles. But they were still without the promised power.

An essential feature of apostleship was first-hand knowledge of the risen Saviour. The apostle must be able to testify of Him as having personally seen Him in His risen estate: hence Paul's third question in 1 Corinthians 9:1. Paul saw Him, not during the forty days but later in the full blaze of His glory. However, from the outset there must be the twelve apostolic witnesses, and Matthias was chosen. They had recourse to the Old Testament practice of casting lots: guidance, such as we read of in Acts 13:2, could not be known until the Holy Ghost had been given.

The action of Peter in proposing to place another in Judas' place was not a mistake as some claim. Peter acted upon the Scriptures and was guided by the Lord. Some hold that Paul was meant to be the twelfth apostle. This is incorrect. Paul's apostleship was of an entirely different nature than that of the twelve. Not till Israel 's complete failure had been demonstrated in the stoning of Stephen was he called, and then not of men, but by revelation of Jesus Christ. There is positive proof that the Holy Spirit sanctioned this action of the disciples. See 1 Corinthians 15:5-8. Furthermore, twelve apostles were needed as a body of witnesses to the entire nation. How strange it would have been if Peter and the ten, eleven men in all, instead of twelve, had stood up on the day of Pentecost to witness to Christ in the presence of the assembled multitude.

"And they appointed two, Joseph called Barsabas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias." For these two had qualifications, as far as man knew, suitable to the requirements for an apostle, being the companions of the earthly path of the Lord Jesus. They had seen Him risen from the dead. Unable to judge between them definitely, the rest spread the matter before the Lord who must choose His own apostle. The mode of the disciples in this case, it is true, might seem peculiar to us; but I have no doubt that they were guided of the Lord. There is no reason from scripture to believe that Peter and the others acted hastily, or were mistaken. The Spirit of God in this very book sanctions the choice that was made that day, and never alludes to Paul as the necessary twelfth apostle. To do so would be, in my judgment, to weaken if not to ruin the truth of God. Paul was not one of the twelve. It is of all consequence that he should be permitted to retain a special place, who had a special work. All was wisely ordered.

Here then they prayed, and said, "Thou, Lord, which knowest the hearts of all men, show whether of these two thou hast chosen." Man never chooses an apostle; apostles did not, could not, elect an apostle: the Lord alone chose. And so they gave forth their lots after a Jewish fashion. The twelve apostles were clearly, as it seems to me, in relation to the twelve tribes of Israel, "and they gave forth their lots." This was sanctioned of God in the Old Testament when Israel was before Him; it will be sanctioned of God when Israel returns on the scene in the latter day. No doubt, when the assembly of God was in being, the lot disappears; but the assembly of God was not yet formed. All would be in order in due time. "They gave forth their lots; and the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was numbered with the eleven apostles." We shall find a little later, yet before Paul appears, that "the twelve" are recognised. So says the Spirit of God.

Peter quotes Psalm 41:9 to the effect that another should take the office of Judas. On this scriptural basis they act, being careful that the man appointed must be one who had companied with them during all the time of the Lord's ministry on earth until His ascension, for he must be a competent witness to the resurrection of Christ. Evidently they chose the two men most qualified for this, then prayed concerning them that the Lord would indicate by lot His choice in the matter. Again, they no doubt depended on the instruction of Proverbs 16:33: "the lot is cast into the lap; but the whole disposing thereof is of the Lord." After the Spirit of God had come, this would be no longer the way of God's making His mind known. Some have objected that Peter and the apostles were not guided by God in this matter, but scripture makes no comment one way or the other, and it is wiser that we leave the matter as scripture does.

Peter in his quotation connects two psalms (Ps. 69:25; Ps. 109:8); the first fulfilled in the judgment at which his own hands had doubly wrought, the second as defining the duty which now pressed upon them. The office which he has shamed and cast aside is not to be left vacant to bear witness of the enemy's victory. All has been provided for, — all has been specified beforehand in the prescient wisdom of God, which cannot be taken by surprise or overmatched by Satan's subtlety or power. Nay, the Word is shown by his apparent success only the more fully master in all circumstances. It lies with them now to see filled up their broken ranks, — not by the appointment of a fresh apostle, for which plainly they have no authority, but by choosing out from among themselves those who had the necessary qualifications for one who was to be a witness of that wondrous life which had shone out among men, and then referring to the Lord Himself to determine which of these was according to His mind.

Scripture had settled for them what His mind was as to the place being filled; for the determining of the individual there was the lot, used so often in Israel for a matter like this. They had even the scripture for this, that. if "the lot is cast into the lap, the whole disposing thereof is of the Lord" (Pro. 16:33). They had no reason to doubt, therefore, that they would have His guidance in acting on such an assurance; the Spirit had not yet come; and this, which some have taken to cast doubt upon the issue, and to dispute Matthias, right to the apostleship, they had no ground for believing to be a cause for delay when Scripture was thus clear. They acted in obedience, not in self-confidence; we never find their act disputed afterwards, and we have surely no right to dispute it now. It would be a totally different thing to imitate their conduct, now that the Spirit of God is come.

It is true that we have nothing of Matthias afterwards; but the same could be said of most of the apostles; nor of the fancied substitution of Paul for him at a later time have we any proof whatever. We have no reason for believing Matthias to have been other than his name imports, "the gift of the Lord" to them, according to their faith; and it is a happy thing to see faith acting in them in such simplicity and confidence, the word of God being its justification as always, — in this case before the Spirit has come. When He comes, it will not be to render us less subject to the Word, but on the contrary, to give us the fulness of it, even of the Old Testament; and the new dispensation which is now being introduced, with all its higher blessing, will confirm the old.

'And they put forward two, Joseph called Barsabbas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias. And they prayed and said, Thou, Lord, knower of the hearts of all, show of these two which one Thou hast chosen, to take the place of this service and apostleship from which Judas fell away to go to his own place. And they gave lots for them; and the lot fell on Matthias; and he was numbered with the eleven apostles' (vers. 15-26).