Acts 1:24

Act 1:24-25. And they prayed — With great seriousness and solemnity, and in faith, persuaded their prayer would be answered; Thou, Lord, which knowest the hearts of all men — With all the counsels, the designs, and desires thereof, with every secret sentiment of the soul, and all the future circumstances of every one’s life; show whether of these two thou hast chosen — They do not say, which of the seventy, for in the opinion of all present, none could stand in competition with these; but, which of these two, for they were persuaded Christ would appoint one of them, and it was determined to acquiesce entirely in his choice. It is fit God should choose his own servants, and so far as, by the disposals of his providence, the gifts of his Spirit, or in any other way, he shows whom he hath chosen, or what he hath chosen for us, we ought readily to comply with him, and to be perfectly satisfied. It is a comfort to us to be assured, in all our prayers for the welfare of the church and its ministers, that the God we pray to knows the hearts of all men, and hath them not only under his eye, but in his hand, and can turn them which way soever he will; can make them fit for his purpose if he do not find them so, by giving them another spirit. That he may take part of this ministry — The ministry of the gospel, the apostleship; may join with us in the work of serving Christ and his church; and glorifying God in saving the souls of men, and may share with us in the honour and happiness thereof; from which Judas by transgression fell, that he might go to his own place — His own, that is, says Grotius, “qui ipsi melius conveniebat quam apostolica functio,” which was more suitable for him than the apostolic office. The expression evidently means a place worthy of him, and which he had deserved by his sin. Hence some manuscripts, instead of ιδιον, his own, read δικαιον, just; that he might go to his just or proper place, a place agreeable to his actions, and therefore assigned him by the righteous judgment of God; namely, a place of punishment in hell. But it is objected, that it belonged not to Peter to pass sentence on Judas, or to affirm any thing of God’s secret counsels, such as Judas’s being consigned to future punishment. “This,” says Dr. Whitby, “is wonderful; that when Christ had pronounced him a devil; (Joh 6:71;) a son of perdition; (Joh 17:12;) and declared that it had been better for him that he had never been born; (Mat 26:24;) it should be thought a diving into God’s secrets, to say he went into a place prepared for, or due to, such miscreants. Moreover, doth not our Saviour say, this fall of the son of perdition was foretold in the Scripture? Joh 17:12. Does not Peter here apply those Scriptures to him, which foretel the most dreadful things? And does not Luke show the dreadful issue of his iniquity upon his body? And after all this, might he not say, he went to a place proper for him? Whosoever betrays an Israelite into the hands of the Gentiles, say the Jews, hath no part in the world to come; how much less he who betrays the Messiah, the king of Israel, into the hands of the Gentiles, or of his enemies? Mat 20:19; and Mat 26:24.”

Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Chapter 4

THE ELECTION OF MATTHIAS.

Act_1:24-26

We have selected the incident of this apostolic election as the central point round which to group the events of the ten days expectation which elapsed between the Ascension and Pentecost. But though this election is a most important fact, in itself and in the principles involved therein, yet there are numerous other circumstances in this waiting time which demand and will amply repay our thoughtful attention.

I. There is, for instance, the simple fact that ten days were allowed to elapse between Christs departure and the fulfilment of His promise to send the Comforter to take His place with His bereaved flock. The work of the worlds salvation depended upon the outcome of this Divine agent. "Tarry ye in the city till ye be endued with power from on high"; and all the time souls were hurrying on to destruction, and society was becoming worse and worse, and Satans hold upon the world was daily growing in strength. God, however, acted in this interval according to the principles we see illustrated in nature as well as in revelation. He does nothing in a hurry. The Incarnation was postponed for thousands of years. When the Incarnation took place, Christ grew up slowly, and developed patiently, till the day of His manifestation to Israel. And now that Christs public work on earth was done, there is no haste in the further development of the plan of salvation, but ten days are suffered, to elapse before His promise is fulfilled. What a rebuke we read in the Divine methods of that faithless, unbelieving haste which marks and mars so many of our efforts for truth and righteousness, and specially so in these concluding years of the nineteenth century. Never did the Church stand more in need of the lesson so often thus impressed upon her by her Divine Teacher. As Christ did not strive nor cry, neither did any man hear His voice in the streets, so neither did He make haste, because He lived animated by Divine strength and wisdom, which make even apparent delay and defeat conduce to the attainment of the highest ends of love and mercy. And so, too, Christs Church still does not need the bustle, the haste, the unnatural excitement which the world thinks needful, because she labours under a sense of Divine guidance, and imitates His example who kept His Apostles waiting ten long days before He fulfilled His appointed promise. What a lesson of comfort, again, this Divine delay teaches! We are often inclined to murmur in secret at the slow progress of Gods Church and kingdom. We think that if we had the management of the worlds affairs things would have been ordered otherwise, and the progress of truth be one long-continued march of triumph. A consideration of the Divine delays in the past helps us to bear this burden, though it may not explain the difficulty. Gods delays have turned out to His greater glory in the past, and they who wait patiently upon Him will find the Divine delays of the present dispensation equally well ordered.

II. Then again, how carefully, even in His delays, God honours the elder dispensation, though now it had grown old and was ready to vanish away. Christianity had none of that revolutionary spirit which makes a clean sweep of old institutions to build up a new fabric in their stead. Christianity, on the contrary, rooted itself in the past, retained old institutions and old ideas, elevating indeed and spiritualising them, and thus slowly broadened down from precedent to precedent. This truly conservative spirit of the new dispensation is manifest in every arrangement, and specially reveals itself in the times selected for the great events of our Lords ministry-Easter, Ascension, then the ten days of expectation, and then Pentecost. And it was most fitting that it should be so. The old dispensation was a shadow and picture of the higher and better covenant one day to be unfolded. Moses was told to make the tabernacle after the pattern shown to him in the mount, and the whole typical system of Judaism was modelled after a heavenly original to which Christ conformed in the work of mans salvation.

At the first Passover, the paschal lamb was offered up and the deliverance from Egypt effected; and so, too, at the Passover the true Paschal Lamb, Jesus Christ, was presented unto God as an acceptable sacrifice, and the deliverance effected of the true Israel from the spiritual Egypt of the world. Forty days after the Passover, Israel came to the mount of God, into which Moses ascended that he might receive the gifts for the people; and forty days after the last great Paschal Offering, the great spiritual Captain and Deliverer ascended into the Mount of God, that He, in turn, might receive highest spiritual blessings and a new law of life for Gods true people. Then there came the ten days of expectation and trial, when the Apostles were called to wait upon God and prove the blessings of patient abiding upon Him, just as the Israelites were called to wait upon God while Moses was absent in the mount. But how different the conduct of the Apostles from that of the more carnal Jews! How typical of the future of the two religions - the Jewish and the Christian! The Jews walked by sight, and not byfaith; they grew impatient, and made an image, the golden calf, to be their visible Deity. The Apostles tarried in patience, because they were walking by faith, and they received in return the blessing of an ever-present unseen Guide and Comforter to lead them, and all who like them seek His help, into the ways of truth and peace. And then, when the waiting time is past, the feast of Pentecost comes, and at Pentecost, the feast of the giving of the old law, as the Jews counted it, the new law of life and power, written not on stony tables, but on the fleshy tables of the heart is granted in the gift of the Divine Comforter. All the lines of the old system are carefully followed, and Christianity is thus shown to be, not a novel invention, but the development and fulfilment of Gods ancient purposes. We can scarcely appreciate nowadays the importance and stress laid upon this view among the ancient expositors and apologists. It was a favourite taunt used by the pagans of Greece and Rome against Christianity that it was only a religion of yesterday, a mere novelty, as compared with their own systems, which descended to them from the dawn of history. This taunt has been indeed most useful in its results for us moderns, because it led the ancient Christians to pay the most careful attention to chronology and historical studies, producing as the result works like "The Chronicle of Eusebius," to which secular history itself owes the greatest obligations.

The heathens reproached Christians with the novelty of their faith, and then the early Christians replied by pointing to history, which proved that the Jewish religion was far older than any other, maintaining at the same time that Christianity was merely the development of the Jewish religion, the completion and fulfilment in fact and reality of what Judaism had shadowed forth in the ritual of the Passover and of Pentecost.

III. We notice again in this connection the place where the Apostles met, and the manner in which they continued to assemble after the ascension, and while they waited for the fulfilment of the Masters promise: "They returned unto Jerusalem, and they went up into an upper chamber." Round this upper room at Jerusalem has gathered many a story dating from very early ages indeed. The upper room in which they assembled has been identified with the chamber in which the Last Supper was celebrated, and where the gift of the Holy Ghost was first received, and that from ancient times. Epiphanius, a Christian writer of the fourth century, to whom we owe much precious information concerning the early ages of the Church, tells us that there was a church built on this spot even in Hadrians time, that is, about the year 120 A.D. The Empress Helena, again, the mother of Constantine the Great, identified or thought she identified the spot, and built a splendid church to mark it out for all time; and succeeding ages have spent much care and thought upon it. St. Cyril of Jerusalem was a writer little referred to and little known in our day, who yet has much precious truth to teach us. He was a learned bishop of Jerusalem about the middle of the fourth century, and he left us catechetical lectures, showing what pains and trouble the Early Church took in the inculcation of the fundamental articles of the Christian creed. His catechetical lectures, delivered to the candidates for baptism, contain much valuable evidence of the belief, the practice, and the discipline of the early ages, and they mention among other points the church built upon Mount Zion on the spot once occupied by this upper room. The tradition, then, which deals with this chamber and points out its site goes back to the ages of persecution; and yet it is notable how little trouble the book of the Acts of the Apostles takes in this matter. It is just the same with this upper chamber as with the other localities in which our Lords mighty works were wrought. The Gospels tell us not where His temptations occurred, though man has often tried to fix the exact locality. The site of the Transfiguration and of the true Mount of Beatitudes has engaged much human curiosity; the scene of Peters vision at Joppa and of St. Pauls conversion on the road to Damascus, -all these and many other divinely honoured localities of the Old as well as of the New Testament have been shrouded from us in thickest darkness, that we might learn not to fix our eyes upon the external husk, the locality, the circumstances, the time, which are nothing, but upon the interior spirit, the love, the unity, the devotion and self-sacrifice which constitute in the Divine sight the very heart and core of our holy religion. They assembled themselves, too, in this upper chamber in a united spirit, such as Christianity, though only in an undeveloped shape, already dictated. The Apostles "continued steadfastly in prayer, with the women also, and Mary, the mother of Jesus." The spirit of Christianity was, I say, already manifesting itself.

In the temple, as in the synagogues to this day, the women prayed in a separate place; they were not united with the men, but parted from them by a screen. But in Christ Jesus there was to be neither male nor female. The man in virtue of his manhood had no advantage or superiority over the woman in virtue of her womanhood; and so the Apostles gathered themselves at the footstool of their common Father in union with the women, and with Mary the mother of Jesus. How simple, again, this last mention of the Blessed Virgin Mother of the Lord! how strangely and strongly contrasted the scriptural record is with the fables and legends which have grown up round the memory of her whom all generations must ever call blessed. Nothing, in fact, shows more plainly the historic character of the book we are studying than a comparison of this last simple notice with the legend of the assumption of the Blessed Virgin as it has been held since the fifth century, and as it is now believed in the Church of Rome. The popular account of this fabled incident arose in the East amid the controversies which rent the Church concerning the Person of Christ in the fifth century. It taught that the Holy Virgin, a year or so after the ascension, besought the Lord to release her; upon which the angel Gabriel was sent to announce her departure in three days time. The Apostles were thereupon summoned from the different parts of the world whither they had departed. John came from Ephesus, Peter from Rome, Thomas from India, each being miraculously wafted on a cloud from his special sphere of labour, while those of the apostolic company who had died were raised for the occasion. On the third day the Lord descended from heaven with the angels, and took to Himself the soul of the Virgin. The Jews then attempted to burn the body, which was miraculously rescued and buried in a new tomb, prepared by Joseph of Arimathaea in the Valley of Jehoshaphat. For two days the angels were heard singing at the tomb, but on the third day their songs ceased, and the Apostles then knew that the body had been transferred to Paradise. St. Thomas was indeed vouchsafed a glimpse of her ascension, and at his request she dropped him her girdle as a token, whereupon he went to his brother Apostles and declared her sepulchre to be empty. The Apostles regarded this as merely a sign of his customary incredulity, but on production of the girdle they were convinced, and on visiting the grave found the body gone.

Can any contrast be greater or more striking between the inspired narrative, composed for the purpose of ministering to godly life and practice, and such legendary fables as this, invented to gratify mere human curiosity, or to secure a temporary controversial triumph? The Divine narrative shrouds in thickest darkness details which have no spiritual significance, no direct bearing on the work of mans salvation. The human fable intrudes into the things unseen, and revels with a childish delight in the regions of the supernatural and miraculous.

What a striking likeness do we trace between the composition of the Acts and of the Gospels in this direction! The self-restraint of the evangelical writers is wondrous. Had the Evangelists been mere human biographers, how they would have delighted to expatiate on the childhood and youth and earlier years of Christs manhood. The apocryphal Gospels composed in the second and third centuries show us what Our Gospels would have been had they been written by men destitute of an abundant supply of the Divine Spirit. They enter into the most minute incidents of our Lords childhood, tell us of His games, His schoolboy days, of the flashes of the supernatural glory which ever betrayed the awful Being who lay hidden beneath. The Gospels, on the other hand, fling a hallowed and reverent veil over all the details, or almost all the details, of our Lords early life. They tell us of His birth, and its circumstances and surroundings, that we might learn the needful lesson of the infinite glory, the transcendent greatness of lowliness and humiliation. They give us a glimpse of our Lords development when twelve years old, that we may learn the spiritual strength and force which are produced through the discipline of obedience and patient waiting upon God; and then all else is concealed from human vision till the hour was come for the manifestation of the full-orbed God-Man. And as it was with the Eternal Son, so was it with that earthly parent whom the consensus of universal Christendom has agreed to honour as the type of devout faith, of humble submission, of loving motherhood. Fable has grown thick round her in mere human narrative, but when we turn to the inspired Word, whether in the Gospels or in the Acts, - for it is all the same in both, - we find a story simple, restrained, and yet captivating in all its details, ministering indeed to no prurient curiosity, yet rich in all the materials which serve to devout meditation, culminating in this last record, where the earthly parent finally disappears from out of sight, eclipsed by the heavenly glory of the Divine Son:-"These all continued stedfastly in prayer, with the women, and Mary, the mother of Jesus."

IV. And then we have the record of the apostolic election, which is rich in teaching. We note the person who took the first step, and his character, so thoroughly in unison with that picture which the four Gospels present. St. Peter was not a forward man in the bad sense of the word, but he possessed that energetic, forcible character to which men yield a natural leadership. Till St. Paul appeared St. Peter was regarded as the spokesman of the apostolic band, just as during our Lords earthly ministry the same position was by tacit consent accorded to him. He was one of those men who cannot remain inactive, especially when they see anything wanting. There are some men who can see a defect just as clearly, but their first thought is, What have I to do with it? They behold the need, but it never strikes them that they should attempt to rectify it. St. Peter was just the opposite: when he saw a fault or a want his disposition and his natural gifts at once impelled him to strive to rectify it. When our Lord, in view of the contending rumours afloat concerning His ministry and authority, applied this searching test to His Apostles, "But whom do ye say that I am?" it was Peter that boldly responded, "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God." Just as a short time afterwards the same Peter incurred Christs condemnation when he rebuked the Saviour for the prophecy of His forthcoming death and humiliation. The character of St. Peter as depicted in the Gospels and the Acts is at unison with itself. It is that of one ever generous, courageous, intensely sympathetic, impulsive, but deficient, as impulsive and sympathetic characters often are, m that staying power, that capacity to bear up under defeat, discouragement, and darkness which so conspicuously marked out the great Apostle of the Gentiles, and made him such a pillar in the spiritual temple of the New Jerusalem. Yet St. Peter did his own work, for God can ever find employment suitable to every type of that vast variety of temperament which finds shelter beneath the roof of Christs Church. St. Peters impulsiveness, chastened by prayer, solemnised by his own sad personal experience, deepened by the bitter sorrow consequent on his terrible fall, urged him to take the first conscious step as the leader of the newly-constituted society. How very similar the Peter of the Acts is to the Peter of St. Matthew; what an undesigned evidence of the truth of these records we trace in the picture of St. Peter presented by either narrative! Just as St. Peter was in the Gospels the first to confess at Caesarea, the first to strike in the garden, the first to fail in the high priests palace, so was he the first "to stand up in these days in the midst of the brethren," and propose the first corporate movement on the Churchs part.

Here again we note that his attitude at this apostolic election proves that the interviews which St. Peter held with Christ after the Resurrection must have been lengthened, intimate, and frequent, for St. Peters whole view of the Christian organisation seems thoroughly changed. Christ had continued with His Apostles during forty days, speaking to them of the things concerning the kingdom of God; and St. Peter, as he had been for years one of the Lords most intimate friends, so he doubtless still held the same trusted position in these post-resurrection days. The Lord revealed to him the outlines of His kingdom, and sketched for him the main lines of its development, teaching him that the Church was not to be a knot of personal disciples, dependent upon His manifested bodily presence, and dissolving into its original elements as soon as that bodily presence ceased to be realised by the eye of sense; but was rather to be a corporation with perpetual succession, to use legal language, whose great work was to be an unceasing witness to Christs resurrection. If Peters mind had not been thus illuminated and guided by the personal instruction of Christ, how came it to pass that prior to the descent of the Spirit the Apostles move with no uncertain step in this matter, and unhesitatingly fill up the blank in the sacred college by the election of Matthias into the place left vacant by the terrible fall of Judas? The speech of St. Peter and the choice of this new Apostle reflect light back upon the forty days of waiting. No objection is raised, no warm debate takes place such as heralded the solution of the vexed question concerning circumcision at the council of Jerusalem; no one suggests that as Christ Himself had not supplied the vacancy the choice should be postponed till after the fulfilment of the Masters mysterious promise, because they were all instructed as to our Lords wishes by the conversations held with Christ during His risen and glorified life.

Let us pause a little to meditate upon an objection which might have been here raised. Why fill up what Christ Himself left vacant? some shortsighted objector might have urged; and yet we see good reason why Christ may have omitted to supply the place of Judas, and may have designed that the Apostles themselves should have done so. Our Lord Jesus Christ gifted His Apostles with corporate power; He bestowed upon them authority to act in His stead and name; and it is not Gods way of action to grant power and authority, and then to allow it to remain unexercised and undeveloped. When God confers any gift He expects that it shall be used for His honour and mans benefit. The Lord had bestowed upon the Apostles the highest honour, the most wondrous power ever given to men. He had called them to an office of which He Himself had spoken very mysterious things. He had told them that, in virtue of the apostolic dignity conferred upon them, they should in the regeneration of all things sit upon thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. He had spoken, too, of a mysterious authority with which they were invested, so that their decisions here upon earth would be ratified and confirmed in the region of heavenly realities. Yet when a gap is made by successful sin in the number of the mystical twelve, who are to judge the twelve tribes, He leaves the selection of a new Apostle to the remaining eleven, in order that they may be compelled to stir up the grace of God which was in them, and to exercise the power entrusted to them under a due sense of responsibility. The Lord thus wished to teach the Church from the earliest days to walk alone. The Apostles had been long enough depending on His personal presence and guidance, and now, that they might learn to exercise the privileges and duties of their Divine freedom, He leaves them to choose one to fill that position of supernatural rank and office from which Judas had fallen. The risen Saviour acted in grace as God ever acts in nature. He bestowed His gifts lavishly and generously and then expected man to respond to the gifts by making that good use of them which earnest prayer, sanctified reason, and Christian common-sense dictated.

St. Peters action is notable, too, in another aspect. St. Peter was undoubtedly the natural leader of the apostolic band during those earliest days of the Churchs history. Our Lord Himself recognised his natural gifts as qualifying him to fulfil this position. There is no necessity for a denial on our part of the reality of St. Peters privilege as contained in such passages as the verse which says, "I will give unto thee (Peter) the keys of the kingdom of heaven." He was eminently energetic, vigorous, quick in action. But we find no traces of that despotic authority as prince of the Apostles and supreme head over the whole Church with which some would fain invest St. Peter and his successors. St. Peter steps forward first on this occasion, as again on the day of Pentecost, and again before the high priest after the healing of the impotent man, and yet again at the council of Jerusalem; for, as we have already noted, St. Peter possessed in abundance that natural energy which impels a man to action without any desire for notoriety or any wish to thrust himself into positions of undue eminence. But then on every occasion St. Peter speaks as an equal to his equals. He claims no supreme authority; no authority, in fact, at all over and beyond what the others possessed. He does not, for instance, on this occasion claim the right as Christs vicar to nominate an Apostle into the place of Judas. He merely asserts his lawful place in Christs kingdom as first among a body of equals to suggest a course of action to the whole body which he knew to be in keeping with the Masters wishes, and in fulfilment of His revealed intentions.

V. The address of St. Peter led the Apostles to practical action. He laid the basis of it in the book of Psalms, the mystical application of which to our Lord and His sufferings he recognises, selecting passages from the sixty-ninth and the one hundredth and ninth Psalms as depicting the sin and the fate of Judas Iscariot; and then sets forth the necessity of filling up the vacancy in the apostolic office, a fact of which he had doubtless been certified by the Master Himself. He speaks as if the College of the Apostles had a definite work and office; a witness peculiar to themselves as Apostles, which no others except Apostles could render. This is manifest from the language of St. Peter. He lays down the conditions of a possible Apostle: he must have been a witness of all that Jesus had done and taught from the time of His baptism to His ascension. But this qualification alone would not make a man an Apostle, or qualify him to bear the witness peculiar to the apostolic office. There were evidently numerous such witnesses, but they were not Apostles, and had none of the power and privileges of the Twelve. He must be chosen by his brother Apostles. and their choice must be endorsed by heaven; and then the chosen witness, who had known the past, could testify to the resurrection in particular, with a weight, authority, and dignity he never possessed before. The apostolic office was the germ out of which the whole Christian ministry was developed, and the apostolic witness was typical of that witness to the resurrection which is not the duty alone, but also the strength and glory of the Christian ministry; for it is only as the ministers and witnesses of a risen and glorified Christ that they differ from the officials of a purely human association.

After St. Peter had spoken, two persons were selected as possessing the qualifications needful in the successor of Judas. Then when the Apostles had elected they prayed, and cast lots as between the two, and the final selection of Matthias was made. Questions have sometimes been raised as to this method of election, and attempts have been sometimes made to follow the precedent here set. The lot has at times been used to supersede the exercise of human judgment, not only in Church elections, but in the ordinary matters of life; but if this passage is closely examined, it will be seen that it affords no justification for any such practice. The Apostles did not use the lot so as to supersede the exercise of their own powers, or relieve them of that personal responsibility which God has imposed on men, whether as individuals, or as gathered in societies civil or ecclesiastical. The Apostles brought their private judgment into play, searched, debated, voted, and, as the result, chose two persons equally well qualified for the apostolic office. Then, when they had done their best, they left the decision to the lot, just as men often do still; and if we believe in the efficacy of prayer and a particular Providence ordering the affairs of men, I do not see that any wiser course can ever be taken, under similar circumstances, than that which the Apostles adopted on this occasion. But we must be careful to observe that the Apostles did not trust to the lot absolutely and completely. That would have been trusting to mere chance. They first did their utmost, exercised their own knowledge and judgment, and then, having done their part, they prayerfully left the final result to God, in humble confidence that He would show what was best.

The two selected candidates were Joseph Barsabas and Matthias, neither of whom ever appeared before in the story of our Lords life, and yet both had been His disciples all through His earthly career. What lessons for ourselves may we learn from these men! These two eminent servants of God, either of whom their brethren counted worthy, to succeed into the apostolic College, appear just this once in the sacred narrative, and then disappear for ever. Indeed it is with the Apostles as we have already noted in the case of our Lords life and the story of the Blessed Virgin, the self-restraint of the sacred narrative is most striking. What fields for romance! What wide scope for the exercise of imagination would the lives of the Apostles have opened out if the writers of our sacred books had not been guided and directed by a Divine power outside and beyond themselves. We are not, indeed, left without the materials for a comparison in this respect, most consoling and most instructive for the devout Christian.

Apocryphal histories of all the Apostles abound on every side, some of them dating from the second century itself. Many of them indeed are regular romances. The Clementine Homilies and Recognitions form a religious novel, entering into the most elaborate details of the labours, preaching, and travels of the Apostle Peter. Every one of the other Apostles, and many of the earliest disciples too, had gospels forged in their honour; there was the Gospel of Peter, of Thomas, of Nicodemus, and of many others. And so it was with St. Matthias. Five hundred years after Christ the Gospel of Matthias was known and repudiated as a fiction. A mass of tradition, too, grew up round him, telling of his labours and martyrdom, as some said in Ethiopia, and as others in Eastern Asia.

Clement, a writer who lived about the year 200, at Alexandria, recounts for us some sayings traditionally ascribed to St. Matthias, all of a severe and sternly ascetic tone. But in reality we know nothing either of what St. Matthias did or of what he taught. The genuine writings of apostolic times carry their own credentials with them in this respect. They are dignified and natural. They indulge in no details to exalt their heroes, or to minister to that love of the strange and marvellous which lies at the root of so much religious error. They were written to exalt Christ and Christ alone, and they deal, therefore, with the work of Apostles merely so far as the story tends to increase the glory of the Master, not that of His servants. Surely this repression of the human agents, this withdrawal of them into the darkness of obscurity, is one of the best evidences of the genuineness of the New Testament. One or two of the earliest witnesses of the Cross have their story told at some length. Peter and Paul, when compared with James or John or Matthias, figure very largely in the New Testament narrative. But even they have allotted to them a mere brief outline of a portion of their work, and all the rest is hidden from us. The vast majority even of the Apostles have their names alone recorded, while nothing is told concerning their labours or their sufferings. If the Apostles were deceivers, they were deceivers who sought their rewards neither in this life, where they gained nothing but loss of all things, nor in the pages of history, where their own hands and the hands of their friends consigned their brightest deeds to an obscurity no eye can pierce. But they were not deceivers. They were the noblest benefactors of the race, men whose minds and hearts and imaginations were filled with the glory of their risen Redeemer. Their one desire was that Christ alone should be magnified, and to this end they willed to lose themselves in the boundless sea of His risen glory. And thus they have left us a noble and inspiriting example. We are not apostles, martyrs, or confessors, yet we often find it hard to take our part and do our duty in the spirit displayed by Matthias and Joseph called Barsabas. We long for public recognition and public reward. We chafe and fret and fume internally because we have to bear our temptations and suffer our trials and do our work unknown and unrecognised by all but God. Let the example of these holy men help us to put away all such vain thoughts. God Himself is our all-seeing and our ever-present Judge. The Incarnate Master Himself is watching us. The angels and the spirits of the just made perfect are witnesses of our earthly struggles. No matter how low, how humble, how insignificant the story of our spiritual trials and struggles, they are all marked in heaven by that Divine Master who will at last reward every man, not according to his position in the world, but in strict accordance with the principles of infallible justice.

William Robertson Nicoll, ed., The Expositor's Bible (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1887–1910) — public domain. 65 of 66 books (1 Corinthians is not separately keyed, as that volume carries no machine-parseable verse references); section-level commentary keyed to the opening verse. Introductory and overview sections not keyed to a specific passage are excluded.

Act 1:24. Σὺ, Thou) Thou Thyself. It was necessary that an apostle should be called by an immediate call of God. They invoke Jesus as Lord; Act 1:21: for it was His province to choose an apostle; Act 1:2, ch. Act 9:17, Act 26:16, Jesus to Saul, “I have appeared unto thee for this purpose, to make thee a minister and a witness;” Joh 6:70, “Have I not chosen you Twelve?”—καρδιογνῶστα, who knowest the hearts) The heart, in the case of a minister of the Gospel, ought to be right: ch. Act 8:21; 2Co 1:12; 1Th 2:4. The heart it is which causes that the one should be preferred to the other, who was at least equally good, judging outwardly.—πάντων, of all) even of these two.—ἀνάδειξον, show) This was effected by the issue of the actual casting of lots. Jesus often appeared after the resurrection: and yet He did not then confer the apostle-ship on Matthias; but after the Ascension.

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Act_1:24-25. Without doubt it was Peter, who prayed in the name of all present. The προσευξάμ. is contemporaneous with εἶπον: praying they said. See on Eph_1:9.

κύριε] יהוה. Comp. Act_4:29. In opposition to the view of Bengel, Olshausen, and Baumgarten, that the prayer is directed to Jesus,for which ὃν ἐξελέξω is appealed to, because Christ chooses His own messengers,Act_15:7 is decisive, where the same Peter says expressly of God: ἐξελέξατο διὰ τοῦ στόματός μου ἀκοῦσαι τὰ ἔθνη, etc., and then also calls God καρδιογνώστης (comp. ח̇קֵר לֵב, Jer_17:10). By the decision of the lot the call to the apostleship was to take place, and the call is that of God, Gal_1:15. God is addressed as καρδιογνώστ. because the object was to choose the intrinsically best qualified among the two, and this was a matter depending on the divine knowledge of the heart. The word itself is found neither in Greek writers nor in the LXX.

In λαβεῖν τὸν τόπον (see the critical notes) the ministry is considered as a place, as a post which the person concerned is to receive. Comp. Sir_12:12.

καὶ ἀποστολῆς] designates more definitely the previous διακονίας. There is thus here, among the many instances for the most part erroneously assumed, a real case of an ἓν διὰ δυοῖν. See Fritzsche, ad Matth. p. 856; Nägelsb. z. Ilias, p. 361, ed. 3.

ἀφʼ ἧς παρέβη] away from which Judas has passed over, to go to his own place. A solemn circumstantiality of description. Judas is vividly depicted, as he, forsaking his apostleship (ἀφʼ ἧς), has passed from that position to go to his own place. Comp. Sir_23:18 : παραβαίνων ἀπὸ τῆς κλίνης αὐτοῦ.

πορευθ. εἰς τ. τόπ. τ. ἴδιον] denotes the end destined by God for the unworthy Judas as his own, to which he must come by his withdrawal from the apostolic office. But the meaning of ὁ τόπος ὁ ἴδιος (the expression is purposely chosen as correlative to τὸν τόπον τ. διακ. etc.) is not to be decided from the linguistic use of τόπος, as τόπος may denote any place, but entirely from the context. And this requires us to understand by it Gehenna, which is conceived as the place to which Judas, according to his individuality, belongs. As his treason was so frightful a crime, the hearers could be in no doubt as to the τόπος ἴδιος. This explanation is also required for the completeness and energy of the speech, and is itself confirmed by analogous rabbinical passages; see in Lightfoot, e.g. Baal Turim, on Num_24:25 : Balaam ivit in locum suum, i.e. in Gehennam. Hence the explanations are to be rejected which refer τόπ. ἴδιος to the habitation of Judas (Keuchen, Moldenhauer, Krebs, Bolten), or to that χωρίον, where he had perished (Elsner, Zeller, Lange, Baumgarten, and others), or to the societas, quam cum sacerdotibus ceterisque Jesu adversariis inierat (Heinrichs). Others (Hammond, Homberg, Heumann, Kypke, comp. already Oecumenius) refer πορευθῆναι … ἴδιον even to the successor of Judas, so that the τόπ. ἴδιος would be the apostleship destined for him. But such a construction would be involved (πορευθ. would require again to be taken as an object of λαβεῖν), and after λαβεῖν … ἀποστολῆς tautological. The reading δίκαιον (instead of ἴδιον) in A hits the correct meaning. The contrast appears in Clem. Cor. I. 5 as to Paul: εἰς τὸν ἅγιον τόπον ἐπορεύθη, and as to Peter: εἰς τὸν ὀφειλόμενον τόπον τῆς δόξης. Comp. Polyc. Phil. 9; Ignat. Magn. 5.

Meyer — Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament — English translation by Peter Christie, edited by Frederick Crombie (T&T Clark, 1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Act 1:24 . Κύριε καρδιογνῶστα … ὃν ἐξελέξω . The words may well have been addressed to Christ: St. Peter had just spoken of Him as the Lord, his own experience and that of his fellow-disciples must have taught him that Jesus was One Who knew the hearts of all men (Joh 2:25 ; Joh 21:17 ), and he had heard his Master’s claim to have chosen the Apostles ( cf. Luk 6:13 ; Luk 5:2 above, where the same verb is used). On the other hand Wendt regards as decisive against this view that St. Peter himself in Act 15:7 says ἐξελέξατο ὁ θεός and then in Act 1:8 calls God καρδιογνώστης ( cf. Jer 17:10 , where Jehovah is said to search the heart). But the passage in Act 15 is much too general in its reference to consider it decisive against any special prerogative ascribed to Jesus here ( viz. , the choice of His own Apostles), and the references to 2Co 1:1 , Eph 2:1 , where St. Paul refers his Apostleship to God, may be fairly met by Act 9:17 ; Act 26:16 . It is quite true that in Act 4:29 Κύριε is used in prayer plainly addressed to the Lord Jehovah, but it is equally certain that prayer was directed to Christ in the earliest days of the Church (Zahn, Skizzen aus dem Leben der alten Kirche , pp. 1 38 and notes), see also below on Act 2:21 (and cf. 1Th 3:11-12 , and 2Th 2:16 ; Archbishop of Armagh in Speaker’s Commentary , iii., 690). ἀνάδειξον : in Luk 10:1 the only other passage in the N.T. where the word is used, it is applied to our Lord’s appointment of the Seventy, and is rendered “appointed,” A. and R.V. But here R.V. renders “show” as A.V. (Rendall, “appoint”). The verb however may be used in the sense of showing forth or clearly, and hence to proclaim, especially a person’s appointment to an office ( cf. the noun ἀνάδειξις also used by St. Luke only in his Gospel, Luk 1:80 ); cf. for the former meaning, Mal 2:8Mal 2:8 ; cf. 2Ma 5:6 , and for the latter, 2 Macc. 9:14, 23, 35; 10:11; 14:12, 26; 1Es 1:35 ; 1Es 8:23 ; so too the use of the word in Polybius and Plutarch (see Grimm-Thayer, sub v. , and Weiss, in loco ).

The Expositor's Greek Testament, edited by W. Robertson Nicoll (1897–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

prayed and said, Thou, Lord, &c.--"The word 'Lord,' placed absolutely, denotes in the New Testament almost universally THE SON; and the words, 'Show whom Thou hast chosen,' are decisive. The apostles are just Christ's messengers: It is He that sends them, and of Him they bear witness. Here, therefore, we have the first example of a prayer offered to the exalted Redeemer; furnishing indirectly the strongest proof of His divinity" [OLSHAUSEN].

which knowest the hearts of all men--See Joh 2:24-25; Joh 21:15-17; Rev 2:23.

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Verse 24. Thou Lord, which knowest the hearts] Συ, κυριε, καρδιογνωστα. The word καρδιογνωστης, the searcher of hearts, seems to be used here as an attribute of God; he knows the hearts, the most secret purposes, intentions, and dispositions of all men; and because he is the knower of hearts, he knew which of these men he had qualified the best, by natural and gracious dispositions and powers, for the important work to which one of them was now to be appointed.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

24. In praying, they said. Word for word it is, Having prayed, they said; but there is no obscurity in the sense, because his meaning was to speak as followeth, that they prayed; and yet he doth not reckon up all the words, being content briefly to show the sum. Therefore, although they were both of honest conversation, yea, although they did excel in holiness and other virtues, yet because the integrity of the heart, whereof God is the alone knower and judge, is the chief, the disciples pray that God would bring that to light which was hidden from men. The same ought to be required even at this day in choosing pastors; for howsoever we are not to appoint two for one, yet because we may oftentimes be deceived, and the discerning of spirits cometh of the Lord, we must always pray unto God, that he will show unto us what men he will have to be ministers, that he may direct and govern our purposes. Here we may also gather what great regard we must have of integrity and innocency in choosing pastors, without which both learning and eloquence, and what excellency soever can be invented, are as nothing.

John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.

(24) Thou, Lord, which knowest the hearts of all men.—Literally, heart-knower of all men. The compound word is not found in any Greek version of the Old Testament, but meets us again in Act_15:8. The question meets us whether the prayer is addressed to the Lord Jesus, as with a recollection of His insight into the hearts of men (Joh_2:24; Joh_6:64), or to the Father. The prayer of Stephen (Act_7:59-60) shows, on the one hand, that direct prayer to the Son was not foreign to the minds of the disciples; and in Joh_6:70, He claims the act of choosing as His own. On the other hand, the analogy of Act_4:29, where the Father is entreated to work signs and wonders “through his holy servant Jesus,” is in favour of the latter view.

“Whether,” as used in the sense of “which of two,” may be noted as one of the archaisms of the English version.

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

24. And they prayed, and said] Here we are not to conclude that St Luke has recorded any more than the purport of the prayer of the disciples, in the same way as in the speeches which he reports he has only preserved a brief abstract of the speakers’ arguments and language.

Thou, Lord, which knowest the hearts of all men] By the lot the final decision was left in the hands of God (cf. Pro_16:33), who alone could know which of these two, both having the needful qualifications as far as man could see, would prove the more excellent Apostle. The same expression is applied to God, Act_15:8.

shew whether of these two] Literally, shew of these two the one whom thou hast chosen.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

And they prayed and said,.... Having proposed the above two persons, and not well knowing which to pitch upon, they being both very agreeable and fit for such service; they chose not to determine the affair without seeking to God for direction; a method to be taken in all cases, and especially in matters of importance: and the substance of their petition, though perhaps not in just the same words, was,

thou, Lord, which knowest the hearts of all men; which is a character peculiar to the one only living, and true God; for none knows the hearts of men, but God, who is the Maker of them; and he knows all the thoughts, counsels, and purposes of them, and the good or bad that is in them:

shew whether of these two thou hast chosen; being desirous of having their choice directed by the choice God had made, in his eternal mind; and which they desired might be signified and pointed out to them, in some way or another, that they might be certain of the mind and will of God, and act according to it.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

24 And they prayed, and said, Thou, Lord, which knowest the hearts of all men, shew whether of these two thou hast chosen,

Ver. 24. Which knowest the hearts] Thales Milesius, qui sapientissimus inter septem fuisse creditur, interrogatus num lateret Deos iniuste agens? respondit, Ne cogitans quidem. Thales being asked whether evil deeds are hidden from God? answered, No, nor evil thoughts either.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

And they prayed - As they could not agree on the individual, they invoked the direction of God in their choice - an example which should be followed in every selection of an individual to exercise the duties of the sacred office of the ministry.

Which knowest the hearts of all men - This is often declared to be the special prerogative of God, Jer 17:10, “I, Yahweh, search the heart,” etc.; Psa 139:1, Psa 139:23; 1Ch 28:9. Yet this attribute is also expressly ascribed to Jesus Christ, Rev 2:18; compare 23, “These things saith the Son of God - I am he which searcheth the reins and the hearts”; Joh 2:25; Joh 6:64; Joh 16:19. There are strong reasons for supposing that the apostles on this occasion addressed this prayer to the Lord Jesus Christ:

The name Lord - Κύριος Kurios - is the common appellation which they gave to him, Act 2:36; Act 7:59-60; Act 10:36; 1Co 2:8; Phi 2:11; Rev 11:8, et al.

(2)We are told that they worshipped him, or rendered him divine honors after his ascension, Luk 24:52.

(3)The disciples were accustomed to address him after his crucifixion by the names Lord or God indifferently, Act 1:6; Joh 20:28; Act 7:59.

(4)This was a matter pertaining especially to the church which the Lord Jesus had redeemed, and “to his own arrangement” in regard to it. He had chosen the apostles; he had given them their commission; he had fixed their number; and, what is worthy of special remark here, he had been the companion of the very men here designated as candidates for the office, and knew their qualifications for this work. If the apostles ever called on the Lord Jesus after his ascension, this was a case in which they would be likely to do it. That it was done is clear from the account of the death of Stephen, Act 7:59-60. And in this important matter of ordaining a new apostle to be a witness for Jesus Christ, nothing was more natural than that they should address him, though bodily absent, as they would assuredly have done if he were present. But if on this occasion they did actually address Christ, then two things clearly follow. First, that it is proper to render him divine homage, agreeably to the uniform declarations of the Scripture: Joh 5:23, “That all men should honor the Son even as they honor the Father”; Heb 1:6, “And let all the angels of God worship him”; Phi 2:10-11; Rev 5:8-14; 1Th 3:11-12. Secondly, he must be divine. To none other but God can religious homage be rendered; and none other can be described as knowing the hearts of all people. The reason why they appealed to him on this occasion as the searcher of the heart was doubtless the great importance of the work to which the successor of Judas was to be called. One apostle of fair external character had proved a traitor; and, with this fact before them, they appealed to the Saviour himself to select one who would be true to him, and not bring dishonor upon his cause.

Show whether ... - Show which of them.

Thou hast chosen - Which of the two thou hast judged to be best qualified for the work.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

The other apostles being chosen by God immediately, it was necessary that he who was to act in the same office, should be chosen after the same manner.

Knowest the heart, which is God’s prerogative only; all others may be, and often are, mistaken by outward appearances.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

24. They prayed—Man proposes, but God disposes. The human part of the work was done in selecting candidates; the Divine work remained of electing.

Which knowest the hearts of all men—This phrase is a feeble rendering of a Greek single term, καρδιογνωστα, heart-searcher. Was this prayer offered to Christ? He claims the prerogative of searching hearts. Rev_2:23. He was the true chooser of apostles. And he was customarily addressed, especially in Luke’s Gospel, by the title Lord, and is styled Lord Jesus in Act_1:21. The probabilities, then, are that the ascended Jesus was here invoked. Note Act_5:1.

Hast chosen—As if Christ’s choice were already made, and the lot only reveals it.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Of these two the one whom for whether of these two, A.V. and T.R.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

See notes on verse 23

J. W. McGarvey (with Philip Y. Pendleton), Commentaries on the New Testament (The Fourfold Gospel, 1914; Acts; and the epistles) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

24. They prayed. That the Lord might choose between them. A choice of men for any responsible church work ought to be made with earnest prayer. It is likely that one of the apostles offered the prayer, all joining in the petition.

B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.

They prayed and said

Here the word "They" refers to all of the believers, but it was probably one of the apostles who spoke these words. AT: "The believers prayed together and one of the apostles said" (See: Assumed Knowledge and Implicit Information)

You, Lord, know the hearts of all people

Here the word "hearts" refers to the thoughts and motives. AT: "You, Lord, know the thoughts and motives of everyone" (See: Metonymy)

to take the place in this ministry and apostleship

Here the word "apostleship" defines what kind of "ministry" this is. AT: "to take Judas' place in this apostolic ministry" or "to take Judas' place in serving as an apostle" (See: Doublet)

from which Judas turned away

Here the expression "turned away" means that Judas stopped performing this ministry. AT: "which Judas stopped fulfilling"

to go to his own place

This phrase refers to Judas' death and likely to his judgment after death. AT: "to go where he belongs" (See: Euphemism)

They cast lots for them

The apostles cast lots to decide between Joseph and Matthias.

the lot fell to Matthias

The lot indicated that Matthias was the one to replace Judas.

he was numbered with the eleven apostles

This can be stated in active form. AT: "the believers considered him to be an apostle with the other eleven" (See: Active or Passive)

translationWords

pray

lord

know

heart

reveal

to minister

apostle

transgress

lots

the twelve

unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.

24. προσευξάμενοι. They made a solemn supplication to God for His guidance. St Luke mentions the only point towards which the whole tenor of their petitions was directed, viz. for light to see God’s choice. No doubt the prayers, like the speeches in the book, were of greater extent than is indicated in the sentence or two of abstract in which the author sums up for us their purport.

The participle προσευξάμενοι, though aorist, is used to express a simultaneous action with the verb, ‘they prayed and (in their prayer) said.’

ἀνάδειξον. Having done their utmost to select fit persons, and having sought God’s blessing on their endeavour, they now ask for some token by which they may be guided in the final choice. From the use of κύριε we may judge that the prayer was addressed to Christ, by whom at first the Twelve had been chosen. καρδιογνώστης is applied to God the Father (Act 15:8), but the Apostles (Joh 2:25) had learnt that their Master ‘knew what was in man.’

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

24.] It is a question, to Whom this prayer was directed. I think all probability is in favour of the Apostle (for Peter certainly was the spokesman) having addressed his glorified Lord. And with this the language of the prayer agrees. No stress can, it is true, be laid on κύριε: see ch. 4:29, where unquestionably the Father is so addressed: but the ἐξελέξω, compared with οὐκ ἐγὼ ὑμᾶς τοὺς δώδεκα ἐξελεξάμην, Joh 6:70, seems to me almost decisive. See also ver. 2; Luk 6:13; Joh 13:18, Joh 13:15:16, Joh 13:19. The instance cited on the other side by Meyer, ἐξελέξατο ὁ θεὸς διὰ τοῦ στόματός μου ἀκοῦσαι τὰ ἔθνη κ.τ.λ., is not to the point, as not relating to the matter here in hand; nor are the passages cited by De Wette, 2Co 1:1; Eph 1:1; 2Ti 1:1, where Paul refers his apostleship to God, since obviously all such appointment must be referred ultimately to God:—but the question for us is,—In these words, did the disciples pray as they would have prayed before the Ascension, or had they Christ in their view? The expression καρδιογνῶστα (used by Peter himself of God, ch. 15:8) forms no objection: see Joh 21:17, also in the mouth of Peter himself. We are sure, from the προσκυνήσαντες αὐτόν of Luk 24:52, that even at this time, before the descent of the Spirit, the highest kind of worship was paid to the ascended Redeemer. Still, I do not regard it as by any means certain that they addressed Christ, nor can the passage be alleged as convincing in controversy with the Socinian.

ἀνάδειξ. κ.τ.λ.] Not, as in E. V., ‘shew whether of these two Thou hast chosen,’ but appoint (see reff.) one of these two (him) whom Thou hast chosen. The difference is of some import: they did not pray for a sign merely, to shew whether of the two was chosen, but that the Lord would, by means of their lot, Himself appoint the one of His choice.

Henry Alford, The Greek Testament (1849–1861) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Which knowest the hearts [καρδιογνωστα] . Only here and ch.

8. Lit, heart - knower.

Marvin R. Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament (1887–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.