Life after Jesus

Introduction:

Jesus has ascended to the Father but left instructions for the apostles to return to Jerusalem.

They obeyed, and Luke has introduced a larger group of followers.

The original apostles, except one, held together: this will be important below.

The group includes the family of Jesus, including his brothers who were previous skeptics.

They were unified and persisted in prayer.

This paragraph ends in a way that reinforces:

Group unity.

Apostolic leadership

Understanding Jesus’ through the teaching of scripture, especially the Psalms.

Important Background:

Luke explains that Peter stood among the brothers in those days.

“these days” provides the chronological understanding of the event.

Jesus has ascended, and it is while the group awaits the coming of the spirit.

“Brothers” is the first designation we encounter of the larger group.

This suggests something about how the saw their relationship with one another.

It becomes a permanent way of Christian communication.

It suggests a new relationship with people who are not blood relatives but who share new, familial ties in Christ. (New birth implications?)

This language gets reinforced by Peter in his address (see Acts 1:16).

The group, ie “crowd of names” approximates 120.

This number may have had Jewish signficance.

Acts: An Introduction and Commentary d. The Twelfth Apostle (1:15–26)

The reason for the parenthesis about the number of disciples is that in Jewish law a minimum of 120 Jewish men was required to establish a community with its own council; in Jewish terms the disciples were a body of sufficient size to form a new community.

Peter’s Address: Part One

According to Luke, Peter spoke to the larger group to frame, biblically, what had happened and why a course of action were needed.

Peter teaches the brothers the following points:

It was necessary for the scripture about Judas to be fulfilled.

Peter understands the scripture to have been spoke prior to the events in question by the Holy Spirit through the mouth of David.

This is an important way of thinking about David that will become increasingly important in Peter’s explanation on the day of Pentecost.

David was not merely the subject of the scriptures: he was a prophet who spoke about the Messiah in his writings.

He explains three things about Judas.

He was guide to those who apprehended Jesus. (This one is secondary to the main points).

“He was numbered among us.”

“He received the lot of this service.”

Peter’s quotation of scripture resumes after Luke interrupts the narrative to give additional details about Judas and the aftermath of his betrayal of Jesus.

Peter combines two different Psalms for one scripture.

Ps. 69 contributes an important statement:

Let his property become desolate and let there be no resident in it.

This might explain why Luke interjected.

It definitely provides context for understanding how the apostles now could use scripture to understand what happened to Jesus and to identify Judas.

Ps. 109 contributes the second important statement:

Let another take his oversight.

In the context of the Psalm, the opposition to the writer (or his subject) becomes embodied in a single individual who, apparently, was so close to the king that he had received an important administrative role.

For his betrayal, this is one of the imprecations pronounced upon him.

Important Background about Judas

Luke uses Acts 1:18-19 to break Peter’s discourse and provide necessary context that his original reader might lack.

He explains:

Judas purchased a field from his unrighteous act.

He came to be “fallen headlong” (some also make a case for this term as a Hellenistic medical term meaning “swollen up.”).

He burst in the middle.

All of his bowels were poured out.

Luke knew this had a long effect on the inhabitants of Jerusalem.

The field became known by a localism: Akeldamah: field of blood (Matthew raises this point too).

Hence, there was memory of Judas and thus to the facts about Judas.

Conclusion:

At least the following things appear to be taking place in this passage:

Unity of a larger group of followers under the leadership of the apostles in the absence of Jesus.

The use of the scriptures to make sense of what happened to Judas in a way that confirms the deity and messiahship of Jesus.

The use of the scriptures to guide the actions of the group as they assume the need to select a replacement for Judas.

The history of the vacancy and the criteria for eligibility for the role.

Introduction:

According to Ps. 69 and Ps. 109, someone close to the Messiah, who embodied opposition to him, would:

Have property remain unoccupied.

His position of responsibility taken by another.

Those two matters have concerned Luke and Peter.

Luke handles one through his contributions to the narrative.

Peter, at the time, focused on the need to choose someone to fill the administrative role.

In Part 2, we will see the congregation narrow it down to two individuals from among them based on very specific criteria.

Through this, we will learn what was important for selecting a replacement.

We will get, therefore, insight into how they understood the apostolic office.

The evolving understanding of the apostolic role.

Peter’s Address Part 2:

In the second part of his address to the brothers, Peter explains the need of the congregation to select a replacement for Judas.

They, then, need to “fill the role” left when Judas abandoned the position to go on to his demise.

Criterion:

He must have been with them the whole time: revisit Luke 6:14-16 and Luke 9.

Those parameters were defined by:

Having begun from John’s baptism.

Until the day he was taken up from us.

What he will become:

A witness of his resurrection with the other apostles.

Jesus had told the apostles they would be his “witnesses.”

This might provide additional insight into what they understood that to mean.

The Process of Selection:

We have a one of a kind selection process described. It does not occur anywhere else in the New Testament..

It appears there were two individuals who met the delineated criterion.

These two stood.

It appears the group as a whole prayed to the Lord, although the language could be limited on to the two men.

The content of the prayer indicates the group prays for th eLord to choose “which of these two you choose.”

The men were given lots, perhaps stones.

Matthias won the lottery.

Prov. 16:33.

We have to be careful and discerning in our use of the scriptures to ensure that we do not make exceptions into the rule. It is better that we remain guided by the scriptures rather than by using exceptions to establish strange practices.