1:15 In view of Peter's leadership gifts, so obvious in the Gospels, it is no surprise that he is the one who took the initiative on this occasion.
"Undoubtedly, the key disciple in Luke's writings is Peter. He was the representative disciple, as well as the leading apostle.64
"Brethren"is literally "disciples"(Gr. matheton). The group of 120 that Peter addressed on this occasion (cf. vv. 13-14) was only a segment of the believers living in Jerusalem at this time (cf. 1 Cor. 15:6, which refers to more than 500 brethren). Nonetheless this was a tiny group from which the church grew. God can take a small number of people, multiply them, and eventually fill the earth with their witness.
1:16-17 Peter addressed the assembled disciples in a way that was evidently customary when speaking to Jews. Here "brethren"is literally "men, brothers"(andres, adelphoi). This same salutation occurs elsewhere in Acts always in formal addresses to Jews (cf. 2:29, 37; 7:2; 13:15, 26, 38; 15:7, 13; 22:1; 23:1, 6; 28:17).
Notice the high regard with which Peter viewed the Old Testament. He believed David's words came from the Holy Spirit (2 Tim. 3:16), and he viewed them as Scripture (holy writings). Peter interpreted David's words about false companions and wicked men who opposed God's servants as applying to Judas. What God had said through David about David's enemy was also true of Jesus' enemy since Jesus was the LORD's Anointed whom David anticipated.
"Since David himself was God's appointed king, many times Scripture treats him as typical of Christ, the unique Anointed One, and David's enemy becomes a type of Jesus' enemy."65
Peter said this Scripture "had"(Gr. dei, by divine necessity) to be fulfilled.
"The understanding [of Peter] here is . . . (1) that God is doing something necessarily involved in his divine plan; (2) that the disciples' lack of comprehension of God's plan is profound, especially with respect to Judas who was one of our number and shared in this ministry' yet also served as guide for those who arrested Jesus'; and (3) that an explicit way of understanding what has been going on under divine direction is through a Christian understanding of two psalms that speak of false companions and wicked men generally, and which by means of the then widely common exegetical rule qal wahomer(light to heavy,' or a minore ad majorem) can also be applied to the false disciple and wicked man par excellence, Judas Iscariot."66
1:18-19 Luke inserted these verses assuming his readers were unfamiliar with Judas' death and did not know Aramaic, the language spoken in Palestine in the first century. This helps us understand for whom he wrote this book. Judas purchased the "Field of Blood"indirectly by returning the money he received for betraying Jesus to the priests who used it to buy the field (Matt. 27:3-10). Probably the name "field of blood"was the nickname the residents of Jerusalem gave it since "blood money"had purchased it.
This account of Judas' death differs from Matthew's who wrote that Judas hanged himself (Matt. 27:5). Undoubtedly both accounts were true. Perhaps Judas hanged himself and in the process also fell and tore open his abdomen. Perhaps the rope or branch with which he hanged himself broke. Perhaps when others cut his corpse down it fell and broke open as Luke described. The traditional location of Hakeldama is southeast of Jerusalem near where the Hinnom and Kidron Valleys meet. This description of Judas' death stressed the awfulness of that apostle's situation. It was Judas' defection, which led to his horrible death, and not just his death that led to the need for a successor. Matthias succeeded Judas because Judas had been unfaithful, not just because he had died.67
1:20 Peter's quotations are from Psalms 69:25 and 109:8. Psalm 69 is an Old Testament passage in which Jesus Himself, as well as the early Christians, saw similarities to and foreviews of Jesus' experiences (cf. John 2:17; 15:25; Rom. 15:3).68Jesus fulfilled the passage Peter cited in the sense that His situation proved to be the same as David's, only on a more significant messianic scale. Peter did not appeal to Psalm 69:25 to justify replacing Judas with another apostle, however. He used the quotation from Psalm 109:8 to do that. It is another verse that Peter applied to Jesus' case since it described something analogous to Jesus' experience. He used what David had written about someone who opposed the LORD's king to support the idea that someone should replace Judas in his office as one of the Twelve.
1:21-22 Why did Peter believe it was "necessary"to choose someone to take Judas' place? Evidently he remembered Jesus' promise that the 12 disciples would sit on 12 thrones in the messianic kingdom judging the 12 tribes of Israel (Matt. 19:28; Luke 22:30; cf. Rev. 21:14). To be as qualified for this ministry as the other 11 disciples the twelfth had to have met the conditions Peter specified.
"In 1:21 Peter speaks not of being with Jesus but of goingwith him on his journeys. . . . This emphasis on journeying with Jesus, particularly on his final journey to the cross, suggests that the apostolic witnesses are qualified not simply because they happened to be present when something happened and so could report it, like witnesses to an accident. Rather they have been taught and trained by Jesus for their work. They shared Jesus' life and work during his mission. In the process they were tested and discovered their own defects. That discovery may also be part of their preparation. The witness of the Galileans does not arise from casual observation. They speak out of a life and mission shared with Jesus, after being taught and tested. From this group the replacement for Judas is chosen."69
"The expression went in and out among us' [NIV] is a Semitic idiom for familiar and unhindered association (cf. Deut 31:2; 2 Sam 3:25; Ps 121:8; Acts 9:28)."70
Having been a witness to Jesus Christ's resurrection was especially important. The apostles prepared so that if Jesus Christ returned very soon and set up His kingdom on the earth they would be ready. Often in biblical history God replaced someone who proved unworthy with a more faithful steward (e.g., Zadok for Ahithophel, Shebna for Eliakim, Samuel for Samson, David for Saul, et al.).
These two verses provide the basis for distinguishing a technical use of "apostle"from the general meaning of the word. By definition an apostle (from apo stello, to send away) is anyone sent out as a messenger. Translators have frequently rendered this word "messenger"in the English Bible. Barnabas, Titus, an unnamed brother, and Epaphroditus were apostles in this sense (Acts 14:4, 14; 2 Cor. 8:23; Phil. 2:25). Every Christian should function as an apostle since Christ has given us the Great Commission. Nevertheless, the Twelve were apostles in a special sense. They not only went out with a message, but they went out having been personally discipled by Jesus Christ during His earthly ministry. They were the official apostles, the apostles who occupied the apostolic office (v. 20) that Jesus established when He first chose and sent out the Twelve (Luke 6:13). As we shall see, Paul was also an official apostle though he had not been personally discipled by Jesus as the Twelve had.
This address of Peter (vv. 16-21) is the first of some 23 speeches that Luke reported in Acts.71How accurate did Luke attempt to be when he recorded them?
"To an extent, of course, all the speeches in Acts are necessarily paraphrastic, for certainly the original delivery contained more detail of argument and more illustrative material than Luke included--as poor Eutychus undoubtedly could testify (Acts 20:7-12)! Stenographic reports they are not, and probably few ever so considered them. They have been reworked, as is required in any précis, and reworked, moreover, in accord with the style of the narrative. But recognition of the kind of writing that produces speeches compatible with the narrative in which they are found should not be interpreted as inaccurate reporting or a lack of traditional source material. After all, a single author is responsible for the literary form of the whole."72
1:23-26 Those present, probably the other apostles, nominated two apparently equally qualified men. Joseph is a Hebrew name, Barsabbas is Aramaic meaning "Son of the Sabbath,"and Justus is Roman. Matthias is Hebrew and is a short form of Mattithia. The apostles then prayed for the Lord to indicate which one He chose (cf. 6:6; 13:3; 14:23; 1 Sam. 22:10; 23:2, 4, 10-12). They acknowledged that only God knows people's hearts (1 Sam. 16:7) and did not make the mistake that the Israelites did when they chose King Saul. They wanted God to identify the man after His heart as He had done with David. Next they cast lots probably by drawing one of two designated stones out of a container or by throwing down specially marked objects (cf. Lev. 16:8; Josh. 14:2; 1 Sam. 14:41-42; Neh. 10:34; 11:1; Prov. 16:33). The Lord identified Matthias as His sovereign choice to fulfill the ministry (service) and apostleship (office) of Judas.73
". . . it was not enough to possess the qualifications other apostles had. Judas's successor must also be appointed by the same Lord who appointed the Eleven."74
This instance of casting lots to determine God's will is the last one the New Testament writers recorded. This was not a vote. Casting lots was necessary before the permanent indwelling of the Holy Spirit, but when He came He provided the guidance inwardly that God had formerly provided externally. Christians do not need to cast lots to determine God's will since now the indwelling Holy Spirit provides that guidance. He does so objectively through Scripture and subjectively through impressing His will on yielded believers.
Was Peter correct in leading the believers to recognize a twelfth apostle, or did God intend Paul to be the replacement?75Paul was, of course, an apostle with authority equal to that of the Twelve. However, Paul had not been with Jesus during His earthly ministry. Luke, Paul's friend, spoke of the Twelve without equivocation as an official group (Acts 2:14; 6:2). Furthermore the distinctly Jewish nature of the future ministry of the Twelve (Matt. 19:28) supports Paul's exclusion from this group. His ministry was primarily to the Gentiles (Gal. 2:9). Paul never claimed to be one of the Twelve, though he did contend that his official apostleship had come to him as a direct commission from the Lord. However, it came from the risen Lord, and he considered himself abnormally born as an apostle (1 Cor. 15:7-8). Finally, there is no hint in Scripture that the decision made on this occasion was a mistake.
". . . the pericope suggests that a Christian decision regarding vocation entails (1) evaluating personal qualifications, (2) earnest prayer, and (3) appointment by Christ himself--an appointment that may come in some culturally related fashion, but in a way clear to those who seek guidance."76
"Matthew concludes with the Resurrection, Mark with the Ascension, Luke with the promise of the Holy Spirit, and John with the promise of the Second Coming. Acts 1 brings all four records together and mentions each of them. The four Gospels funnel into Acts, and Acts is the bridge between the Gospels and the Epistles."77
