Welcome
Prayer
Music
Silence
And when we come back we will conclude Acts chapter 1 picking it up at verse 16.
Okay, we left off last week reading at verse 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,)
We explained last week some reasons why it was Peter who stood up among the others.
So now at verse 16 let’s read what Peter has to say:
Acts 1.end
August 2nd 2015
Milk
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.
Alright, back to verse 15-16:
“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,) VERSE 16
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.
We must take note of a couple of things about these verses.
First of all what were they doing? Choosing another APOSTLE! I mean, I don’t think there could be in the annuls of Church history a MORE important role to be filled that this one – when we really think about it.
The Lord Himself chose the original twelve – knowing full well who He was picking and why – a great picture for us and God’s sovereignty on how He picks and uses all of us for specific purposes – the Judas’s included. Anyway . . .
Here Peter stands up and, among 120 disciples says, “Men and brethren.”
Because he addresses all the males I think we can assume that it was a male only vote. This was a cultural norm – especially coming out of Ancient Israel – so I doubt the women expected anything different.
But we must note that this was the first assembly “convened” to transact a matter in the church – again, picking an apostle.
Who did the picking? Those present. We may let ourselves think it was only the apostles who were doing the picking but this is not what the text infers.
The choice was made by the brethren present.
Today, as cultural norms have adapted and women have been given rights, the congregational vote remains the biblical norm.
We will see that in the course of doing ministry here in the book of Act that the Apostles will have the believers of an area select those who will take on certain labors and we can see right here that this was so from the start.
I mean we might think that to pick a childrens teacher or a missionary or possibly a pastor might have been left to the believers of the area but this was the choice of the twelfth APOSTLE
I mention this because the positions people take in the church today shouldn’t ever be imposed upon believers by a single pastor, or a board of elders or an ecclesiastical governing board or any other “collective.”
We might ask: “Well were all the believers of Jerusalem present at the election of another Apostle?”
Doubtful. Jesus brought many to Himself while He walked the land but all this tells us is all believers do NOT need to be present to make a decision in a church – apparently just some.
If we were going to take the Biblical accounts of such things as gospel truths we would have to say that 120 people need to be present when a decision is made.
To that someone could say, “Yes, but only when electing a new Apostle,” and we quickly begin to see that the literal approach is a fail if taken . . . literally.
So, appealing to the group, Peter has stood and said, “Men and brethren,” adding (in the King James):
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.
I find this translation cumbersome and so appealing to others I found this one that makes the meaning more clear.
Peter stands and says:
Acts 1:16 (MNT) “Men and brothers, it was necessary for the Scripture to be fulfilled which the Holy Spirit uttered beforehand by the lips of David in regard to Judas who acted as guide to those who arrested Jesus.”
In other words, Peter says, “Listen, the Holy Spirit spoke through the lips of David regarding Judas (the one who guided the guards to arrest Jesus) and therefore is was important (or necessary) that this utterance be fulfilled.
It is believed that Peter was referring to a prophetic passage from Psalm 41:9 where David wrote:
“Yea, mine own familiar friend–hath lifted up his heel against me,” and assigned these words to Judas betrayal of Jesus. In so doing he stands up and says to the group as sort of an admittance:
“Listen, it was necessary that the words of David would be fulfilled in the disloyal actions of Judas as he led the temple guards to arrest him.”
It wasn’t that Peter pulled this passage out of thin air to lay the blame on Judas but Peter heard Jesus do the same thing (in John 13:18) and saying
“I know whom I have chosen: but that the scripture may be fulfilled, He that eateth bread with me hath lifted up his heel against me.”
Then speaking of Judas Peter adds:
17 For he was numbered with us, and had obtained part of this ministry.
Interestingly, though Judas was numbered with the original Apostles it does not mean He was e real believer.
Isn’t that intriguing too? That one of the original twelve of those whom Jesus chose was NOT a genuine follower or devotee?
In Matthew Jesus describes the actual church in a similar fashion. Listen to the examples He gives by parable in Matthew 13:
First, He says:
24 The kingdom of heaven (and you will see that when Jesus says the Kingdom of Heaven He is speaking of the Kingdom of God, and the Chruch) The Kingdom of Heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field:
25 But while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way.
26 But when the blade was sprung up, and brought forth fruit, then appeared the tares also.
27 So the servants of the householder came and said unto him, Sir, didst not thou sow good seed in thy field? from whence then hath it tares?
28 He said unto them, An enemy hath done this. The servants said unto him, Wilt thou then that we go and gather them up?
29 But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them.
30 Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.
Apparently there is a wheat and weed that appear very similar in the early stages of their growth and it’s not until maturity that they can be told apart.
With this being the case it is interesting that speaking of the wheat and tares that Jesus says let “them grow up together” because if you endeavor to remove the tares early you may mistake them for genuine wheat – so let them mature together – they will reveal of which type they are in time.
We see that Jesus did this very thing with Judas – He let Him run His course ultimately revealing his true heart.
In Matthew 13:47 Jesus says: Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto a net, that was cast into the sea, and gathered of every kind:
48 Which, when it was full, they drew to shore, and sat down, and gathered the good into vessels, but cast the bad away.
Notice again that the net is cast, the fish are drawn in and then when IT WAS FULL, it was drawn to shore and the fishermen SAT DOWN and began a sort – gathering the good into vessels but casting the bad away.
Same exact principle. Wait till the nets are full. Bring them to shore THEN do the sorting.
Jesus adds:
49 So shall it be at the end of the age: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just,
50 And shall cast them into the furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.
And in yet another parable Jesus says:
In the same chapter Jesus presents another parable and says:
31 The kingdom of heaven is like to a grain of mustard seed, which a man took, and sowed in his field:
32 Which indeed is the least of all seeds: but when it is grown, it is the greatest among herbs, and becometh a tree, so that the birds of the air come and lodge in the branches thereof.
Many people think that this is a picture of the church growing up into a great system of religion but looking carefully at the word choice of the Lord it seems that He is describing something ugly.
The mustard seed is extremely small and the church will begin this way, but in time Jesus has the seed grow into a great tree, so large that Jesus says:
“The birds of the air come and lodge in the branches thereof.”
Birds in the Bible are often symbols of evil – and so the imagery is one of the church expanding out into a giant tree, unlike anything it started out being, and would get so big birds would be able to find their lodging in its “branches.”
In this parable the Lord never describes the fate of these foul – don’t know why.
A final and very short parable Jesus shares begins and ends with verse 33 of Matthew 13 with Jesus saying:
“The kingdom of heaven is like unto leaven, which a woman took, and hid in three measures of meal, till the whole was leavened.”
Again, many people – I’ve even heard an LDS apostle taking this parable and describing it in positive terms – but all we need to do is look at the biblical view of leaven and what leaven actually does to meal and we can see that Jesus was not describing a good thing.
Instead, the church is depicted as three measures of meal but a woman came along and hid (planted or sowed) yeast in the meal until the whole of it was leavened (affected/ corrupted).
Unleavened bread is what the Jews ate. And leaven, as it feasts off the sugars in the meal leaves a residue of gas that puffs up and corrupts the rest of the meal.
This is not a good thing.
Getting back to the point, within the church, the Kingdom, there are birds, bad fish, weeds, and leaven.
They will be discovered and known and ultimately segregated from the good. But until this happens believers are to exist in unity and love – just as Jesus existed for three years in unity and love with Judas – whom He knew would betray Him.
Speaking of Judas, Luke makes it seem like Peter continues talking here but in my opinion Luke adds verse 18 and 19 into the narrative as a parenthetical reference as a means to explain to Theophilus (and to all of us) the story of Judas. He may not have known that the Judas story would be included in the Gospels when he penned Acts as Luke himself does NOT include these details in his gospel.
I also say this because it’s doubtful that Peter would actually say verses 18 and 19 to those who knew perfectly well the story of Judas – it was common knowledge, as we will read in a moment.
In any case, whoever said verses 18-19 this is what was written
18 Now this man (Judas) purchased a field with the reward of iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out.
Naturally we find what seems like a contradiction at first glance because the Gospel accounts say that Judas took the silver and threw it back at the Sanhedrim – and then he went and hanged himself.
From that perspective there would have been no way that he could have gone and purchased a field with the money he was given for his betrayal.
What is the solution? It’s a solution that pops up frequently in our study of scripture – and the answer lies in the culture and the way they said things back then.
Luke here says, “now this man purchased a field with the reward of iniquity” but the reality is the Jews did the purchasing.
In Matthew 27, once Judas was convicted of his crime we read that Judas went back to the chief priests :
5 And he cast down the pieces of silver in the temple, and departed, and went and hanged himself.
6 And the chief priests took the silver pieces, and said, It is not lawful for to put them into the treasury, because it is the price of blood.
7 And they took counsel, and bought with them the potter’s field, to bury strangers in.
8 Wherefore that field was called, The field of blood, unto this day.
Of course Luke saying that Judas fell headlong and burst asunder with his bowels gushing out and the Gospel accounts saying that he hanged himself we know that the solution is both occurred – he hung himself, probably bloated, the rope burst and he fell headlong, landing in a way that caused his guts to spill out.
And when Luke here in Acts writes that Judas purchased the field the solution lies in the fact that they bought the field in his name as they would never buy it in their own as they considered the money blood money.
Believe it or not (and as a side note) back in the day when really strange LDS doctrines were allowed to fly about and their temple ceremony had people show how life could be taken, some of the brethren were of the opinion that the other apostles gathered around Judas, and applying one of the penalties of death illustrated in the temple covenant, personally kicked him until his guts burst out.
Amazing what we can create for ourselves, isn’t it? In verse 19 Peter continues with a self-explanatory verse:
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.
Then Peter, seeking to replace Judas, quotes from Psalms again, and says
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.
This is what the passage in the Old Testament says:
(Psalm 69:25 “Let their habitation be desolate; and let none dwell in their tents.”
We have to see and admit, right off the bat, that Peter did not quote directly from the Hebrew text of Psalm 69 (or the Septuagint translation) and that he modified the passage from Psalm by making the plural (as in Let their habitation) to the singular (“let his habitation) when speaking of Judas.
He also changed the Psalm passage which says “and let none dwell in their tents” to fit Judas and to say, “and let no man dwell therein” AND THEN IT APPEARS THAT HE ADDED,
“and let his bishopric let another take.”
The passage in the Old Testament has reference to God overthrowing and defeating an enemy and so he says:
“Let their families be scattered, and the places where they have dwelt be without an inhabitant, as a reward for their crimes.”
As an image that is expressive of judgment and desolation coming upon those who are enemies of God it is well used by Peter.
And this seems to be what is going on here.
Peter cites a passage of scripture that has application in the Old Testament to a very different situation but one that is similar to what and who Judas was and the vacancy that we left by him due to his evil.
We do this all the time.
Suppose I was to stand up and try and motivate you all to join in bringing eggs, and bacon and sausage on Sundays, and I said in my speech:
“For man shall NOT live by bread alone but by eggs and sausage and bacon too!”
I used the original reference but customized it to make my point.
This is what Peter does here. Don’t make the mistake of trying to rationalize the disparity between the Old Testament account and the New as a means to defend inerrancy as critics will level at this situation.
Peter (or possibly Luke) did exactly what we are describing and in this light we can defend the integrity of scripture.
The reference to letting his bishopric comes from another place in scripture too which Peter incorporates into his speech.
So having taken passages from the Old Testament and assigned them to Judas in this situation Peter now lays out the ground rules for their election, saying (verse 21 and 22)
Wherefore of these men
(so the next apostle was to be a male)
which have companied with us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us (verse 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.
So there are the qualifications Peter lays out for the next apostle whose job, he says at the end of verse 23, “was to be a witness with us of his resurrection.”
In other words they were looking for someone who had witnessed “all” the things they had witness since Peter said they had to have accompanied them “all the time that the Lord went in and out among them.”
Going all the way back to “his baptism of John” up to the day he was “taken up or ascended.”
Now, in Luke chapter 10 we read the following:
Luke 10:1 “After these things the Lord appointed other seventy also, and sent them two and two before his face into every city and place, whither he himself would come.
2 Therefore said he unto them, The harvest truly is great, but the labourers are few: pray ye therefore the Lord of the harvest, that he would send forth labourers into his harvest.
We often forget about these seventy others who were sent out to preach and teach when Jesus was alive. It’s possible that from this special group they were looking to replace Judas.
And Peter adds:
“This one must “be ordained” to be a witness with us of his resurrection.”
Now for us today, the word “ordained,” has a very fixed meaning, doesn’t it? It typically means to set someone apart to a sacred office with some solemn process which typically includes the imposition of hands.
So when we read this translation anyone who does not consult the Greek will assume this is what happened here.
The Greek word here is GIN OM AHEE –and (listen) this is what ginomahee means –
“to make happen.”
It has zero connection to religious ritual, what we would call ordination, or the laying on of hands.
In other places in scripture where the King James translators put ordained the Greek word is DIATASSO and it means –
“to arrange”
NO connection to our version of formal religious ordination folks.
And yet ANOTHER Greek word which is (ALSO TRANSLATED ORDAINED or ORDAIN) in scripture is “KATH IS TAY MEE” and it means “to appoint or constitute.”
In fact, the BEST definition of the Greek word used here in Act 1:22 is “to be”
The New Testament printed at London, by Robert Barker, the king’s printer, in 1615, renders this and the preceding verse more clearly than what we have in our modern version. This is what that version said:
“Wherefore of these men who have companied with us, all the time that the Lord Jesus was conversant among us, beginning from the baptism of John, unto the day he was taken up from us, must one of them BE MADE a witness with us of his resurrection.”
The Greek word usually denoting ordination (epithesis cherio – the imposition of hands) is not used here – not even close.
When we do come to a passage where the laying on of hands is employed we’ll look at those word – just know that here, in the case of choosing an apostle no ordination occurs in the TEXT to suggest that there was a formal religious ceremony performed.
I consulted fourteen other translations – including three literal translations from the Greek and NONE of them use the word ORDAIN, instead they all merely say something to the effect that they group sought someone to be a witness of the resurrected Lord.
Our problem with ordination and ordain in the major denominations stems from the use of this word in the New Testament – especially the King James – which uses the word flagrantly and in what seems to be a means to support established religious norms and practice.
We will run into the word time and time again as we continue forward in our studies. In every case our understanding of ordain today will in some way or another need correction.
So looking around at those who qualify according to what Peter set up as the standard we read (verse 23)
23 And they appointed two, Joseph called Barsabas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias.
They proposed or nominated two. The word is HISTAYMEE and it means they had them stand forth, like two candidates. A vote was about to take place.
“Joseph called Barsabas.”
There are often plays on names and their meanings in scripture and there are a few ideas on who this person was.
Could be the son of Sabas?
Some think a man named Barnabas (who we will meet soon).
Some the son of Alpheus, brother of James the Less.
We don’t know. But he was surnamed Justus, which is Latin meaning “Just” and he probably received this additional name due to his integrity.
And then Luke adds: “And Matthias.”
We literally know nothing about this man – except he must have also been a man of integrity.
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.”
I think the prayer offered here is significant. Listen to the words of verse 24:
“Thou, Lord, which knowest the hearts of all men, shew whether of these two thou hast chosen,”
What we have happening is really interesting and it reveals in some ways the way God works in us and how we work with Him.
This is the key – God is in charge but He does engage us in His purposes.
Look at the order of what went down.
God sent His Son and He came and presented Himself – teaching, loving, doing miracles.
All were invited to come and there were those who chose to follow Him – Mathias and Joseph called Just were some of them.
Time passed. They hung on, witnessing all the things Jesus did.
Now there was a need.
The believers came together and first used their minds to narrow the field – let’s pick those who have been with us since John the Baptist, seen all things, and can be a witness of His Resurrection.
Two men qualified.
The group then prayed. And in their prayer admitted to God that they sought His hand in things again, saying (in their prayer)
“God, YOU know the hearts of all men, shew whether of these two thou hast chosen.”
We will read that they then cast lots, a method taken from the Old Covenant by which the children of Israel decided things.
And then we read verse 26
26 And they gave forth their lots; and the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was numbered with the eleven apostles.
We will cover more on this last verse NEXT WEEK.
REPEAT QUESTION
ANNOUNCE MEETING
ANNOUNCE OUR SUPPLYING CONTENT FOR THE FOLLOWING WEEK
ANNOUNCE DR. PRESTON
PRAYER
