|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Matthias - witness to the Resurrction
|
venbede
Shipmate
# 16669
|
Posted
In Acts 1, 21 - 22, Peter says a replacement for Judas must be "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 must become a witness with us to his resurrection".
In Luke 24, the only witnesses to the resurrection are Cleopas and his chum and "the Eleven". In Acts 1 the witnesses to the resurrection and the ascension are the apostles.
So how was Matthias a witness to the resurrection?
--------------------
Man was made for joy and woe;
And when this we rightly know,
Thro' the world we safely go.
Posts: 3201 | From: An historic market town nestling in the folds of Surrey's rolling North Downs, | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815
|
Posted
What does "witness" mean in this instance? Does it mean someone who saw the empty grave? Very few of these. One who saw the risen Christ? Many more - "including many who are still alive". Or someone who goes out proclaiming the message, as in current day witnesses to the Gospel?
--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican
Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
The NT consistently suggests that there were quite a few people around the events recorded in the Gospels, even if only the Twelve are mentioned. There are enough disciples who have heard the teachings of Christ for Him to to send out not just the Twelve but the Seventy Two. We think of the Last Supper as just Jesus and the Twelve (Eleven after Judas leaves), yet when he goes to the Garden suddenly there is at least one other person present - the lad with the linen garment left behind (traditionally said to be John Mark) - how was he there if he wasn't also at the house beforehand? Acts 1 has about 120 gathered. Paul records that on one occasion the Risen Christ appeared to a group of 500.
There were a lot of people who had seen the Risen Christ, and could act as witnesses that Christ had Risen. A (probably) slightly smaller group who had accompanied Jesus through most of His ministry and could accurately repeat what He had taught. Those two duties, to proclaim the Risen Christ and teach others what Christ had taught, seem to be the priorities of the Apostles in the early chapters of Acts.
When choosing the Seven (Acts 6) the same criteria are not applied - they just need to be men full of the Holy Spirit.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
venbede
Shipmate
# 16669
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
The NT consistently suggests that there were quite a few people around the events recorded in the Gospels, even if only the Twelve are mentioned.
But Theophilus hadn't read the rest of the NT, only Luke.
Does it say in Luke that there are other witnesses to the resurrection other than the Eleven and Cleopas and companion?
To answer my own question, Theophilus may have been expected to know there were other witnesses from the quote in Acts. But it is a bit sloppy of the author. (I have my doubts whether Luke and Acts are the same author.)
--------------------
Man was made for joy and woe;
And when this we rightly know,
Thro' the world we safely go.
Posts: 3201 | From: An historic market town nestling in the folds of Surrey's rolling North Downs, | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by venbede:
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
The NT consistently suggests that there were quite a few people around the events recorded in the Gospels, even if only the Twelve are mentioned.
But Theophilus hadn't read the rest of the NT, only Luke.
How do you know that? By the time Luke wrote his Gospel the letters of Paul had already been written, and were presumably in circulation since Peter references them. Conventionally, Mark was already written and there was also Q.
Luke sets out an "orderly account", that doesn't need to mean the only account that Theophilus had heard.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
venbede: Does it say in Luke that there are other witnesses to the resurrection other than the Eleven and Cleopas and companion?
Yes, and Luke explicitly links them to the empty tomb: Mary Magdalene and Joanna and Mary the mother of James and the other women with them.
(Silly me, they're women. They don't count.)
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Adam.
Like as the
# 4991
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
Luke sets out an "orderly account", that doesn't need to mean the only account that Theophilus had heard.
Actually, we can say for sure that this isn't the only account Theophilus has heard. In Luke 1:4, the author tells us that his purpose in writing is "so that [Theophilus] may know the truth concerning the things about which [he has] been instructed." That said, I'd be a little wary about guessing quite what Theophilus is meant to know, including whether he's read anything that ended up in our New Testament.
--------------------
Ave Crux, Spes Unica!
Preaching blog
Posts: 8164 | From: Notre Dame, IN | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
And there is the question as to whether Theophilus was a real person, or is just a generalised term of address to the reader as "A lover of God".
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Mamacita
Lakefront liberal
# 3659
|
Posted
quote:
...one of these must become a witness with us to his resurrection.’
I think the future tense is key here, that "witness" is a role that the person will be given or will take upon himself. So, I would see "witness" as meaning a person who bears witness to/is an ambassador for... basically, an apostle, not necessarily someone who was there on Easter Morning.
Actually I'm more curious about the first part of the verse:
quote:
So one of the men who have accompanied us throughout the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, beginning from the baptism of John until the day when he was taken up from us
So, Peter was being specific, almost restrictive, when giving parameters for choosing Judas' replacement. It had to be someone who had been there, been steadfast for the whole three years. Matthias must have been in the background all that time, never getting a mention until now. (And no further mention, poor guy.)
[ 16. May 2016, 19:45: Message edited by: Mamacita ]
--------------------
Do not be daunted by the enormity of the world’s grief. Do justly, now. Love mercy, now. Walk humbly, now. You are not obligated to complete the work, but neither are you free to abandon it.
Posts: 20761 | From: where the purple line ends | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
BroJames
Shipmate
# 9636
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by venbede:
In Luke 24, the only witnesses to the resurrection are Cleopas and his chum and "the Eleven". In Acts 1 the witnesses to the resurrection and the ascension are the apostles.
The rather earlier account in 1 Corinthians 15 offers a wider range of possibilities which doesn't read as though it is exhaustive quote:
he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers and sisters at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have died. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles.
Posts: 3374 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mamacita:
I think the future tense is key here, that "witness" is a role that the person will be given or will take upon himself. So, I would see "witness" as meaning a person who bears witness to/is an ambassador for... basically, an apostle, not necessarily someone who was there on Easter Morning.
Thanks Mamacita, that gets to the question I was working towards. I'd extend it forward from that first Easter morning to say not necessarily to have seen the Risen Christ in the following period either(though unlikely not to have).
[edited to fix code]
[ 17. May 2016, 01:49: Message edited by: Mamacita ]
--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican
Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mamacita:
Matthias must have been in the background all that time, never getting a mention until now. (And no further mention, poor guy.)
Most of the Twelve, if we go by mention by name, are also in the background and don't get mentioned again.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mamacita
Lakefront liberal
# 3659
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
Most of the Twelve, if we go by mention by name, are also in the background and don't get mentioned again.
Very true, Alan. For some reason, though, I always think of Matthias as having the proverbial "fifteen minutes of fame."
--------------------
Do not be daunted by the enormity of the world’s grief. Do justly, now. Love mercy, now. Walk humbly, now. You are not obligated to complete the work, but neither are you free to abandon it.
Posts: 20761 | From: where the purple line ends | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mamacita
Lakefront liberal
# 3659
|
Posted
[tangent]
On Sunday I was telling the Godly Play "The Mystery of Pentecost" story to the little kids, and it includes the Ascension and the choosing of Matthias.
So I get to the big part about everybody being filled with the power of the Holy Spirit, and one five-year-old boy blurts out, "Wow! Even the NEW GUY?"
[/tangent]
--------------------
Do not be daunted by the enormity of the world’s grief. Do justly, now. Love mercy, now. Walk humbly, now. You are not obligated to complete the work, but neither are you free to abandon it.
Posts: 20761 | From: where the purple line ends | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mamacita:
So I get to the big part about everybody being filled with the power of the Holy Spirit, and one five-year-old boy blurts out, "Wow! Even the NEW GUY?"
I know it's a tangent, but ...
I was reading a book towards the end of last year by a Pentecostal author on the nature of the church. She considered Pentecost to be an important part of the nature of the church, and so discussed Acts 2 at length.
Her thesis was that the Apostles waited in Jerusalem expecting some form of empowering in the Spirit, as Jesus had promised. But, they were working from a perspective of OT accounts of the Spirit empowering a small group of people - for example the elders of the people called to the Tabernacle in the wilderness, even the two who didn't bother to turn up. So, they were expecting the Spirit to come and empower the Apostles, the leaders of the church. And, therefore they felt compelled to restore the number of Apostles to Twelve before that happened.
She next claims that when Acts 2 says "They were all together" this refers to the 120 mentioned in Acts 1. My concern at this point is that Acts 1 finishes by talking about the Twelve, and so it isn't certain if this is the Twelve, the 120 or some other number of disciples. But, I think Peter's speech support there being more than just the Twelve (I'll get to that in a moment). Assuming that this is more than just the Twelve gathered on Pentecost, then it certainly seems that the Spirit descended in power on all who were there - so not just including the new guy, but everyone. Which is something that would be new and unexpected.
Which is where Peter seems to reinforce the fact that this was unexpected. Because he immediately thinks of Joel - "I will pour out my Spirit on all people ... my servants, both men and women, I will pour out my Spirit in those days". This is the last days, this is the day when the Spirit is poured out on all the servants of God, both men and women, not just the Apostles but the whole fellowship, including the new guy.
So, the shock of the five-year old, "WOW, even the NEW GUY!" captures the moment quite well, except it doesn't go far enough. "WOW, even the least important person there!" is closer.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mamacita
Lakefront liberal
# 3659
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
This is the last days, this is the day when the Spirit is poured out on all the servants of God, both men and women, not just the Apostles but the whole fellowship, including the new guy.
So, the shock of the five-year old, "WOW, even the NEW GUY!" captures the moment quite well, except it doesn't go far enough. "WOW, even the least important person there!" is closer.
Yes, I like that very much. Of course I would, seeing as I attend a church with a Pentecost window that portrays a woman (blue dress, so I presume Mary) standing in the midst of the other apostles, also with a flame above her head.
[ 17. May 2016, 19:55: Message edited by: Mamacita ]
--------------------
Do not be daunted by the enormity of the world’s grief. Do justly, now. Love mercy, now. Walk humbly, now. You are not obligated to complete the work, but neither are you free to abandon it.
Posts: 20761 | From: where the purple line ends | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
