Make known to us, Lord, the one you choose

MoreCoffee

Repentance works.
Jan 8, 2011
29,850
2,841
Near the flying spaghetti monster
✟57,848.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
A homily of St John Chrysostom on the Acts of the Apostles

Make known to us, Lord, the one you choose


In those days, Peter, stood up in the midst of the disciples and said... As the fiery spirit to whom the flock was entrusted by Christ and as the leader in the band of the apostles, Peter always took the initiative in speaking: My brothers, we must choose from among our number. He left the decision to the whole body, at once augmenting the honour of those elected and avoiding any suspicion of partiality. For such great occasions can easily lead to trouble.

Did not Peter then have the right to make the choice himself? Certainly he had the right, but he did not want to give the appearance of showing special favour to anyone. Besides he was not yet endowed with the Spirit. And they nominated two, we read, Joseph, who was called Barsabbas and surnamed Justus, and Matthias. He himself did not nominate them; all present did. But it was he who brought the issue forward, pointing out that it was not his own idea but had been suggested to him by a scriptural prophecy. So he was speaking not as a teacher but as an interpreter.

So, he goes on, we must choose from those men who lived in our company. Notice how insistent he is that they should be eyewitnesses. Even though the Spirit would come to ratify the choice, Peter regards this prior qualification as most important.

Those who lived in our company, he continued, all through the time when the Lord Jesus came and went among us. He refers to those who had dwelt with Jesus, not just those who had been his disciples. For of course from the very beginning many had followed him. Notice how it is written that Peter himself was one of the two who had listened to John, and followed Jesus.

All through the time when the Lord Jesus came and went among us, beginning with the baptism of John – rightly so, because no one knew what had happened before that time, although they were to know of it later through the Spirit.

Up to the day, Peter added, on which he was taken up from us – one of these must be made a witness along with us of his resurrection. He did not say “a witness of the rest of his actions” but only a witness of the resurrection. That witness would be more believable who could declare that he who ate and drank and was crucified also rose from the dead. He needed to be a witness not of the times before or after that event, and not of the signs and wonders, but only of the resurrection itself. For the rest happened by general admission, openly; but the resurrection took place secretly, and was known to these men only.

And they all prayed together, saying: You, Lord, know the hearts of men; make your choice known to us. “You,” not “we.” Appropriately they said that he knew the hearts of men, because the choice was to be made by him, not by others.

They spoke with such confidence, because someone had to be appointed. They did not say “choose” but make known to us the chosen one; the one you choose, they said, fully aware that everything was pre-ordained by God. They then drew lots. For they did not think themselves worthy to make the choice of their own accord, and therefore they wanted some sign for their instruction.
 

Esdra

Senior Contributor
Sep 18, 2011
6,440
1,344
Tyrol, Austria
✟29,267.00
Country
Austria
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
This is a topic that's interested me for a while. When Mattias was chosen, is it possible that the remaining 11 had cast lots presumptuously, considering that the Lord either had or was about to choose Paul?

? When the 11 chose the 12th Apostle, Matias, Paul was still a Jew an prosecuting the Early Christians, or am I mistaken?

Esdra
 
Upvote 0

Esdra

Senior Contributor
Sep 18, 2011
6,440
1,344
Tyrol, Austria
✟29,267.00
Country
Austria
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Well I don't think so, as Peter says in Acts 2:21+22, "So one of the men who have accompanied us during all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, beginning from the baptism of John until the day he was taken up from us - one of those must become a witness with us to his resurrection." (NRSV-CE)
And Paul doesn't fulfill that requirement.
However, you could say he became the 13th apostle.
 
Upvote 0

Fireinfolding

Well-Known Member
Dec 17, 2006
27,263
4,084
The South
✟121,561.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
For the original twelve Paul does not fit that requirement as stipulated by Peter himself.

Paul said he receive the gospel by revelation, that he wasnt taught it by man.

I sorta like the fact the twelve werent those notified of the Lord when he chose Paul to be an apostle to the Gentiles. Annanias was informed after the fact. And the Lord (outside of their knowledge) sends Annabias to lay hands on Paul to receive his sight after the vision he received directly from the Lord himself.

I like thats in there actually, shows the Lord is in control of those he himself calls. And in Pauls case the Lord went around his eleven (who were by the psalms) are informed to let another take the bishoprick of Judas. They understanding the psalms were speaking of him (on this matter) and casted lots between two (one being chosen) to be of these according to Peters instruction.
 
Upvote 0

x141

...
Sep 25, 2011
5,138
466
Where you are ...
Visit site
✟25,111.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
It's possible that Paul had been chosen before he knew it.

Gal 1:15 But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb, and called me by his grace,

Gal 4:26 But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.

This refers to when and how he knew.



An Ishmael always comes first.

As well as the choice was between two sons or fruits, but there was already a David being prepared.
 
Upvote 0

x141

...
Sep 25, 2011
5,138
466
Where you are ...
Visit site
✟25,111.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
A homily of St John Chrysostom on the Acts of the Apostles

Make known to us, Lord, the one you choose


In those days, Peter, stood up in the midst of the disciples and said... As the fiery spirit to whom the flock was entrusted by Christ and as the leader in the band of the apostles, Peter always took the initiative in speaking: My brothers, we must choose from among our number. He left the decision to the whole body, at once augmenting the honour of those elected and avoiding any suspicion of partiality. For such great occasions can easily lead to trouble.

Did not Peter then have the right to make the choice himself? Certainly he had the right, but he did not want to give the appearance of showing special favour to anyone. Besides he was not yet endowed with the Spirit. And they nominated two, we read, Joseph, who was called Barsabbas and surnamed Justus, and Matthias. He himself did not nominate them; all present did. But it was he who brought the issue forward, pointing out that it was not his own idea but had been suggested to him by a scriptural prophecy. So he was speaking not as a teacher but as an interpreter.

So, he goes on, we must choose from those men who lived in our company. Notice how insistent he is that they should be eyewitnesses. Even though the Spirit would come to ratify the choice, Peter regards this prior qualification as most important.

Those who lived in our company, he continued, all through the time when the Lord Jesus came and went among us. He refers to those who had dwelt with Jesus, not just those who had been his disciples. For of course from the very beginning many had followed him. Notice how it is written that Peter himself was one of the two who had listened to John, and followed Jesus.

All through the time when the Lord Jesus came and went among us, beginning with the baptism of John – rightly so, because no one knew what had happened before that time, although they were to know of it later through the Spirit.

Up to the day, Peter added, on which he was taken up from us – one of these must be made a witness along with us of his resurrection. He did not say “a witness of the rest of his actions” but only a witness of the resurrection. That witness would be more believable who could declare that he who ate and drank and was crucified also rose from the dead. He needed to be a witness not of the times before or after that event, and not of the signs and wonders, but only of the resurrection itself. For the rest happened by general admission, openly; but the resurrection took place secretly, and was known to these men only.

And they all prayed together, saying: You, Lord, know the hearts of men; make your choice known to us. “You,” not “we.” Appropriately they said that he knew the hearts of men, because the choice was to be made by him, not by others.

They spoke with such confidence, because someone had to be appointed. They did not say “choose” but make known to us the chosen one; the one you choose, they said, fully aware that everything was pre-ordained by God. They then drew lots. For they did not think themselves worthy to make the choice of their own accord, and therefore they wanted some sign for their instruction.

God chose Saul to be king ... or it would appear that he had.
 
Upvote 0

MoreCoffee

Repentance works.
Jan 8, 2011
29,850
2,841
Near the flying spaghetti monster
✟57,848.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
This is a topic that's interested me for a while. When Mattias was chosen, is it possible that the remaining 11 had cast lots presumptuously, considering that the Lord either had or was about to choose Paul?

I do not think that Matthias was chosen in presumption or in error although I have heard some say as much. Those who say such things seek to elevate saint Paul - perhaps because saint Paul wrote many letters that are included in the new testament. But the task of the twelve is stated in the words of saint Peter's interpretation of the prophecy about Judas' departure from the group of twelve apostles (red text below).
When they entered the city they went to the upper room where they were staying, Peter and John and James and Andrew, Philip and Thomas, Bartholomew and Matthew, James son of Alphaeus, Simon the Zealot, and Judas son of James. All these devoted themselves with one accord to prayer, together with some women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and his brothers.

During those days Peter stood up in the midst of the brothers (there was a group of about one hundred and twenty persons in the one place). He said, My brothers, the scripture had to be fulfilled which the holy Spirit spoke beforehand through the mouth of David, concerning Judas, who was the guide for those who arrested Jesus. He was numbered among us and was allotted a share in this ministry. He bought a parcel of land with the wages of his iniquity, and falling headlong, he burst open in the middle, and all his insides spilled out. This became known to everyone who lived in Jerusalem, so that the parcel of land was called in their language 'Akeldama,' that is, Field of Blood. For it is written in the Book of Psalms:
'Let his encampment become desolate, and may no one dwell in it.'​
And:
'May another take his office.'​
Therefore, it is necessary that one of the men who accompanied us the whole time the Lord Jesus came and went among us, beginning from the baptism of John until the day on which he was taken up from us, become with us a witness to his resurrection.
(Acts 1:13-22 NAB)

Paul could never be one of the twelve because he was not with Jesus from the Jesus' baptism by John until the day of Christ's ascension into heaven. He was not able to be a witness of the resurrection because he was not present for the 40 days between Christ's rising from the grave until he ascended. Saint Paul was an apostle but not one of the twelve whose task was to bear testimony to seeing the physically risen Christ on Earth.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
N

Nanopants

Guest
I do not think that Matthias was chosen in presumption or in error although I have heard some say as much. Those who say such things seek to elevate saint Paul - perhaps because saint Paul wrote many letters that are included in the new testament. But the task of the twelve is stated in the words of saint Peter's interpretation of the prophecy about Judas' departure from the group of twelve apostles (red text below).
When they entered the city they went to the upper room where they were staying, Peter and John and James and Andrew, Philip and Thomas, Bartholomew and Matthew, James son of Alphaeus, Simon the Zealot, and Judas son of James. All these devoted themselves with one accord to prayer, together with some women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and his brothers.

During those days Peter stood up in the midst of the brothers (there was a group of about one hundred and twenty persons in the one place). He said, My brothers, the scripture had to be fulfilled which the holy Spirit spoke beforehand through the mouth of David, concerning Judas, who was the guide for those who arrested Jesus. He was numbered among us and was allotted a share in this ministry. He bought a parcel of land with the wages of his iniquity, and falling headlong, he burst open in the middle, and all his insides spilled out. This became known to everyone who lived in Jerusalem, so that the parcel of land was called in their language 'Akeldama,' that is, Field of Blood. For it is written in the Book of Psalms:
'Let his encampment become desolate, and may no one dwell in it.'​
And:
'May another take his office.'​
Therefore, it is necessary that one of the men who accompanied us the whole time the Lord Jesus came and went among us, beginning from the baptism of John until the day on which he was taken up from us, become with us a witness to his resurrection.
(Acts 1:13-22 NAB)
Paul could never be one of the twelve because he was not with Jesus from the Jesus' baptism by John until the day of Christ's ascension into heaven. He was not able to be a witness of the resurrection because he was not present for the 40 days between Christ's rising from the grave until he ascended. Saint Paul was an apostle but not one of the twelve whose task was to bear testimony to seeing the physically risen Christ on Earth.

Good points. In my case it's not that I want Paul to be elevated over Matias per se, it's that the experience Paul was given when he was hand picked by God seems to be much more of a significant event to me than the casting of lots. In wondering why the 12th would be chosen by lot, but Paul chosen through a miracle, this presumption theory is the first thing that jumps out at me as the likely explanation. Maybe there's a better explanation.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Fireinfolding
Upvote 0
N

Nanopants

Guest
For the original twelve Paul does not fit that requirement as stipulated by Peter himself.

Paul said he receive the gospel by revelation, that he wasnt taught it by man.

I sorta like the fact the twelve werent those notified of the Lord when he chose Paul to be an apostle to the Gentiles. Annanias was informed after the fact. And the Lord (outside of their knowledge) sends Annabias to lay hands on Paul to receive his sight after the vision he received directly from the Lord himself.

I like thats in there actually, shows the Lord is in control of those he himself calls. And in Pauls case the Lord went around his eleven (who were by the psalms) are informed to let another take the bishoprick of Judas. They understanding the psalms were speaking of him (on this matter) and casted lots between two (one being chosen) to be of these according to Peters instruction.

Also very good points. I never thought of that.
 
Upvote 0

MoreCoffee

Repentance works.
Jan 8, 2011
29,850
2,841
Near the flying spaghetti monster
✟57,848.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
Good points. In my case it's not that I want Paul to be elevated over Matias per se, it's that the experience Paul was given when he was hand picked by God seems to be much more of a significant event to me than the casting of lots. In wondering why the 12th would be chosen by lot, but Paul chosen through a miracle, this presumption theory is the first thing that jumps out at me as the likely explanation. Maybe there's a better explanation.

Casting lots was a traditional way to see the will of God.
The lot is cast into the lap, but the decision is the LORD's alone. (Proverbs 16:33 NRSV)
 
Upvote 0

Noxot

anarchist personalist
Site Supporter
Aug 6, 2007
8,191
2,450
37
dallas, texas
Visit site
✟231,339.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
St John Chrysostom is an awesome dude, I just got done listening to his: Commentary on Galatians
by St. John Chrysostom
Translated Anonymously and Revised by Gross Alexander (unknown dates)

St. Chrysostom’s Commentary on the Epistle to the Galatians is continuous, according to chapter and verse, instead of being arranged in Homilies, with a moral or practical application at their close, as in his exposition of other Epistles. It was written in Antioch, as Montfaucon infers from a reference which the Author, makes upon Chap. i., ver. 16 to other of his writings, which certainly were written about the same time in that city. (Introduction from the preface by John Henry Newman)


LibriVox » Commentary on Galatians by St. John Chrysostom

good stuff and worth the 4 hours and 30 mins of listening.
 
Upvote 0