“21 So one of the men who have accompanied us during all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, 22 beginning from the baptism of John until the day when he was taken up from us-one of these men must become with us a witness to his resurrection.” – Acts 1:21-22
“to take the place in this ministry and apostleship from which Judas turned aside to go to his own place.” – Acts 1:25
What was the main reason for the apostles to appoint a replacement for Judas Iscariot?
At this time, after much unified prayer, the apostles believed three main things about their apostolic roles.
First, the nature of their apostolic office is ministry (“diakonia”, or service), not power. In Acts 1:8, Jesus commissioned them to be witnesses for Him to the ends of the earth. They understood then that they had to serve Jesus and the world by being witnesses. The word for apostle (“apostolos”) is used to mean to be sent from. To be sent by Jesus was their service.
Second, the purpose of their apostolic ministry was primarily to be witnesses to Jesus’ resurrection. In Acts 1:3, Jesus proved Himself alive to them by many proofs. Hence, the apostles set a criteria for their replacement apostle: this person must have followed Jesus along with the other disciples from the beginning of Jesus’ public ministry to His ascension. In other words, he must have personally witnessed Jesus’ ministry, death and resurrection in order to be a witness for Jesus.
Third, the predestined event of an apostolic office being made vacant and being replaced was to fulfil prophecy in Psalms 69:25 and 109:8. Hence, Peter quoted these verses to indicate that this was ordained by God. God is in control.
It is remarkable that there were only 2 candidates who fulfil the criteria of having personally witnessed Jesus’ ministry, death and resurrection, and remained with the apostles. Thousands had followed Jesus around during His incarnate life. Yet, only 2 remained. This may be a sombre reality check for us. Many may see Jesus; few follow Him to the end.
It is also noteworthy that of the 11 remaining original apostles, and the 2 candidates mentioned here, we do not see much of them individually (save for Peter and John) in the rest of Acts. It almost seems like it did not matter whether it was Matthias or Barsabbas who was appointed the replacement apostle. I suppose it should be characteristic of Jesus’ servants to just go about serving dutifully without desiring to be outstanding in reputation.
In this sense, the apostles have come a long way from the time that they were before during Jesus’ incarnate life. In Luke 9:46-56, the apostles were fighting among themselves to be “the greatest”; they wanted to prevent anyone else from doing good in Jesus’ name; they wanted to call fire down from heaven to burn a Samaritan village for being unwelcoming to Jesus; all of which Jesus rebuked the apostles for.
In contrast, apart from specific instances involving certain individual apostles due to specific circumstances, the apostles, including the later additions, served humbly, nondescriptly, and collectively. The point is the scrutiny of the internal motivation, not that one should resist the external endowment of honour by others.
What then for us? In our service to Jesus and the world, we must constantly examine our motivations: is there humility, a denial of self for Jesus to fill us, direct us and shine through us? Or is there something self-centred or self-aggrandising?
We must persevere in serving Jesus humbly, lest we fail to finish well. And through that, as He did with just a few humble witnesses, Jesus can build His Kingdom and reach the ends of the earth. Because God is in control.