The Twelfth Disciple

[DiscipleOfIAm]

I say Jude was the twelfth Disciple. What say you?

God Bless!

[Matthan]

How did you reach that conclusion?

[DiscipleOfIAm]

How did you reach that conclusion?
I read something by Dr Elmer Towns and this is his view as well. I'll see if I can find a link to the article, but it definitely gives very good arguments for this.

Did you have another possibility?

[arunma]

I'm curious as to what is meant by "the twelvth disciple" here. The names of all twelve Apostles are given in the Gospel, with the exception that Judas Iscariot was replaced by Matthias.

[Matthan]

Yes, in Acts we clearly get the name of the Twelth disciple, which is why I asked my question. I've never heard of Jude or any other except those name in Scripture as even being mentioned as one of the original or eventual twelve.

Matthan

[DiscipleOfIAm]

Yes, in Acts we clearly get the name of the Twelth disciple, which is why I asked my question. I've never heard of Jude or any other except those name in Scripture as even being mentioned as one of the original or eventual twelve.

Matthan
Possibly I've misunderstood Drs Towns and Hindson? I'll have to check with them, but in a lecture recently it was made clear that the belief is that Jude was the twelfth disciple per their belief. again, I'll have to ask them about this.

[Seeker of the Truth]

lol... funny!

[DiscipleOfIAm]

Why's that funny? Either Matthan is incorrect or the fine Drs are. I don't see in Acts where are told exactly who all the disciples were. Why would two men with numerous years of study and education, who were ont he NKJV committees, etc make that up? Honestly, not being sarcastic. Are they making this up that there is a mystery disciple?

[Seeker of the Truth]

Why's that funny? Either Matthan is incorrect or the fine Drs are. I don't see in Acts where are told exactly who all the disciples were. Why would two men with numerous years of study and education, who were ont he NKJV committees, etc make that up? Honestly, not being sarcastic. Are they making this up that there is a mystery disciple?
It's funny that you made two thread based on two articles you read and nobody knows what you're talking about. :D

I mean that in the nicest way! ;)

[BereanTodd]

Why's that funny? Either Matthan is incorrect or the fine Drs are. I don't see in Acts where are told exactly who all the disciples were.

First off there were hundreds of disciples. There were 12 apostles. There is a distinct difference. Now of the 12 apostles, we know their names from the Gospels. Judas obviously gets removed and that leaves one spot amongst the 11 others. In the first couple of chapters of Acts they choose Matthias as the replacement.

Now, if we want to claim that there are more than 12 apostles, that is not a ridiculous claim, there is some argument for that. But to say that Jude is one of the "12" has to rely on completely unbiblical sources; more than that it contradicts what the Bible clearly says.

[Seeker of the Truth]

Yeah, Disciples there's a lot of them.

I was reading some of Foxe's Book of Martyrs and there are tons of Disciples, which confused me because I confused the word 'disciple' with 'apostle.'

[DiscipleOfIAm]

It's funny that you made two thread based on two articles you read and nobody knows what you're talking about. :D

I mean that in the nicest way! ;)
I suppose it's funny. These "articles" and teachings came from a Theology course that Dr Elmer Towns teaches at Liberty University and another course that Dr Ed Hindson teaches as well. In them, he states that he believes that Luke wrote Hebrews and that Jude was the twelfth disciple. He goes on to briefly state why he believes these things, but of course, the funny part is that I cannot find that part of it.

I suppose next time I start a thread I'll make sure I have their information available to link. I guess I just thought this spur would some interesting discussion, but has instead spurred some ridicule on me for bringing it up. Apparently, their beliefs are not too popular. I found them convincing and interesting, but I seem to be alone in that arena.

Maybe I got caught up in all of their credentials and experience and took for granted that what they were saying was accurate. They did present a good argument with Scriptural reference though.

I'll stick to non-theological and doctrinal threads from now on for safety!

God Bless!

[DeaconDean]

So far as I have read, by name, the only three mentioned in the NT are Matthias:

"And they gave forth their lots; and the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was numbered with the eleven apostles." -Acts 1:26

Barnabas:

"But when the apostles Barnabas and Paul heard of this, they tore their clothes and rushed out into the crowd, shouting:" -Acts 14:14

And Paul:

"And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time. For I am the least of the apostles, that am not meet to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. But by the grace of God I am what I am: and his grace which was bestowed upon me was not in vain;" -1 Cor. 15:8-10

The full names before Paul was added are here:

"And when they were come in, they went up into an upper room, where abode both Peter, and James, and John, and Andrew, Philip, and Thomas, Bartholomew, and Matthew, James the son of Alphaeus, and Simon Zelotes, and Judas the brother of James. And they gave forth their lots; and the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was numbered with the eleven apostles." -Acts 1:13,26

Add to this: Paul and Barnabas.

God Bless

Till all are one.

[mlqurgw]

Paul was the Apostle meant to take the place of Judas. Matthias was chosen by vote not by the Lord. The 11 didn't wait for the Lord to appoint that one to take the place of Judas but took matters into their own hands. Paul claims Apostleship in 1Cor. 9:1 and Gal. 1:1. In 1Cor. 15:8 he speaks of being born out of due time. He is talking about his seeing the Lord and being appointed by Him to Apostleship. Add the fact that Matthias is never mentioned again.

[BereanTodd]

Paul was the Apostle meant to take the place of Judas. Matthias was chosen by vote not by the Lord. The 11 didn't wait for the Lord to appoint that one to take the place of Judas but took matters into their own hands. Paul claims Apostleship in 1Cor. 9:1 and Gal. 1:1. In 1Cor. 15:8 he speaks of being born out of due time. He is talking about his seeing the Lord and being appointed by Him to Apostleship. Add the fact that Matthias is never mentioned again.

That isn't nescasarily true. As pointed out, Barnabas is also called an apostle. It is possible that there were more than 12. There is nothing unbiblical about the way they chose Matthias, the OT Jews often cast lots to determine God's direction, the high priest even had special "lots" that he cast. There is nothing negative said in all of Scripture said about either Matthias or their choosing of him.

[wmc1982]

did anyone else hear the idea that maybe Jesus instructed Judas to turn him in?

[Seeker of the Truth]

did anyone else hear the idea that maybe Jesus instructed Judas to turn him in?
I haven't seen that in the Bible anywhere.

[tonysma]

Paul was the Apostle meant to take the place of Judas. Matthias was chosen by vote not by the Lord. The 11 didn't wait for the Lord to appoint that one to take the place of Judas but took matters into their own hands. Paul claims Apostleship in 1Cor. 9:1 and Gal. 1:1. In 1Cor. 15:8 he speaks of being born out of due time. He is talking about his seeing the Lord and being appointed by Him to Apostleship. Add the fact that Matthias is never mentioned again.

I agree...Matthias was chosen by vote...paul was chosen by the lord..that is how the disciples were chosen...by jesus...

[mlqurgw]

That isn't nescasarily true. As pointed out, Barnabas is also called an apostle. It is possible that there were more than 12. There is nothing unbiblical about the way they chose Matthias, the OT Jews often cast lots to determine God's direction, the high priest even had special "lots" that he cast. There is nothing negative said in all of Scripture said about either Matthias or their choosing of him.
I will not debate with you on this as we both could probably come up with pretty convincing arguments either way but what good does it do? I really don't see this as an important issue. However I do think that I ought to let you and others know that I do not hold, as do many modern Baptists, congregational rule. If you would consider that every time in the Scriptures that men placed by God in authority listened to the council of the majority or the ungodly they suffered for it. Moses listened to his father-in-law and the Lord took of the Spirit that was on him and put it on those 70 elders things were never the same with Moses. Ex. 18:13-27, Num. 11:11-17. When David listened to the council of others he decided to bring the Ark up and put it on an new cart and Uzzah died because of it. 1Chron. 13:1-14 Nowhere do we read in the Scriptures of rule being given to any mixed multitude. We do find that God raises up men and puts them in the place He desires them. I believe that faithful pastors are a gift of Christ to His church, Eph. 4: 8-12 Jer. 3:15.

[Matthan]

First off there were hundreds of disciples. There were 12 apostles. There is a distinct difference. Now of the 12 apostles, we know their names from the Gospels. Judas obviously gets removed and that leaves one spot amongst the 11 others. In the first couple of chapters of Acts they choose Matthias as the replacement.

Now, if we want to claim that there are more than 12 apostles, that is not a ridiculous claim, there is some argument for that. But to say that Jude is one of the "12" has to rely on completely unbiblical sources; more than that it contradicts what the Bible clearly says.
Paul, by his own admission, was also an apostle of Jesus Christ (Romans 1:1 and many others)

[Matthan]

I guess I just thought this spur would some interesting discussion, but has instead spurred some ridicule on me for bringing it up. Apparently, their beliefs are not too popular. I found them convincing and interesting, but I seem to be alone in that arena.

God Bless!

Disciple, I have known you far too long through your postings, I have read far too many of your wonderful entries, to ever ridicule you in any conceivable way. There is no more level-headed Christian visiting this site then you, my physically-unknown friend and brother in Christ.

Please keep your posts coming. If there is some confusion in one or two of them, so what. The heart is good, and that is what really counts among Christians, isn't it?

Matthan

[Matthan]

Paul was the Apostle meant to take the place of Judas. Matthias was chosen by vote not by the Lord. The 11 didn't wait for the Lord to appoint that one to take the place of Judas but took matters into their own hands. Paul claims Apostleship in 1Cor. 9:1 and Gal. 1:1. In 1Cor. 15:8 he speaks of being born out of due time. He is talking about his seeing the Lord and being appointed by Him to Apostleship. Add the fact that Matthias is never mentioned again.
I do not believe this is exactly correct. Remember that the Holy Spirit of God was extremely well represented within the Eleven. I think Peter was moved by the Spirit to suggest choosing a replacement, and I also believe the apostles named in Acts 1:23-26 that prayed for the Lord's guidance received it in their selection of Matthias. The results of their casting lots only reflected the will of God.

Just MHo.

Matthan

[Matthan]

I do not believe Paul was the apostle selected to replace Judas, either. Paul was specifically selected to become the apostle to the Gentiles, while all of the others were primarily to be apostles to the Jews. Of course they also witnessed Jesus to the Gentiles, and Paul also witnessed our Lord to the Jews. But Paul was sent far and wide in his journeys, while there is little mention of the others making long trips. In fact, Philip and Peter (writing from the ancient city of Babylon) are possibly the widest of the travelers that did not accompany Paul on his journeys.

Matthan

[BereanTodd]

I will not debate with you on this as we both could probably come up with pretty convincing arguments either way but what good does it do? I really don't see this as an important issue. However I do think that I ought to let you and others know that I do not hold, as do many modern Baptists, congregational rule. If you would consider that every time in the Scriptures that men placed by God in authority listened to the council of the majority or the ungodly they suffered for it. Moses listened to his father-in-law and the Lord took of the Spirit that was on him and put it on those 70 elders things were never the same with Moses. Ex. 18:13-27, Num. 11:11-17. When David listened to the council of others he decided to bring the Ark up and put it on an new cart and Uzzah died because of it. 1Chron. 13:1-14 Nowhere do we read in the Scriptures of rule being given to any mixed multitude. We do find that God raises up men and puts them in the place He desires them. I believe that faithful pastors are a gift of Christ to His church, Eph. 4: 8-12 Jer. 3:15.

I agree with you that the form of government that most baptist churches have (rule of the majority) is very unscriptural and poor. I agree that rule of the majority is not a good thing. Choosing Matthias was not a rule of the majority, it was a casting of lots. Big difference.

[BereanTodd]

Paul, by his own admission, was also an apostle of Jesus Christ (Romans 1:1 and many others)

I do not see where that has anything to do with what I said. I never denied that Paul was an apostle.

[mesue]

Paul was the Apostle meant to take the place of Judas. Matthias was chosen by vote not by the Lord. The 11 didn't wait for the Lord to appoint that one to take the place of Judas but took matters into their own hands. Paul claims Apostleship in 1Cor. 9:1 and Gal. 1:1. In 1Cor. 15:8 he speaks of being born out of due time. He is talking about his seeing the Lord and being appointed by Him to Apostleship. Add the fact that Matthias is never mentioned again.
We hear about a few, but not too many. Of the following, who have we heard from?

Simon, Peter? Yes
Andrew? Not so much.
James the brother of John? Not so much.
John? Yes.
Philip? Kinda'
Bartholomew? Not so much.
Thomas? Not so much.
Matthew? Yes.
James, The Younger? Yes.
Thaddaeus, Jude, not Iscariot? Yes.
Simon the Zealot? Not so much.
Judas Iscariot? No.
Matthias? Not so much.

[DiscipleOfIAm]

Disciple, I have known you far too long through your postings, I have read far too many of your wonderful entries, to ever ridicule you in any conceivable way. There is no more level-headed Christian visiting this site then you, my physically-unknown friend and brother in Christ.

Please keep your posts coming. If there is some confusion in one or two of them, so what. The heart is good, and that is what really counts among Christians, isn't it?

Matthan
Hey Thanks! I appreciate that and the feeling is mutual!

[rustypjr]

I just finished up a lesson on the apostles and this was the Lessons each week.
James the Lesser- Willing To Be a Disciple of Christ
Andrew- The Passionate Disciple
John - The Youngest Disciple
Bartholomew Nathanael- Wrestling Through Prejudice
Judas Iscariot- The Disciple They Thought They Knew
Simon the Zealot- The Unlikely Disciple
Philip- The Rational Disciple
Matthew Levi- Finding What Is Valuable
Judas Thaddaeus- Concern for the World
Simon Peter - Willing to Change
James- Leading Through Serving
Thomas- Learning About Faith