Paul vs Matthias as Judas replacement

Ok, Here is where I am at. I pointed out to a Protestant Scholar where Act’s says that Matthias replaced Judas (while he claims that Paul replaced Judas.)

His response is;

*thank you for the verse. I had to act as if I did not know so you would give me a verse. see, sola scriptura. Now, where in the Bible does it say Judas was saved.

the Bible teaches there are certain criteria for being an apostle 2 cor. 12:12. another one is that Jesus had to personally call someone to be an apostle. wo, what everse can you show me that Jesus called Matthias. In Acts 9 he called Paul.

you have set up a criteria of apostleship that NO ONE including catholic scholsrs hold too. try again*

What would be a good, short Bible based response?

I don’t understand how your sola scriptura friend can question Acts 1, which after all is Scripture. :confused: :shrug:

I’m not sure what all your correspondent is on about (Why does Judas need to be saved!?!?). In any case, the qualifications for Matthias to be an apostle are in Acts 1:21-26.


Therefore, it is necessary that one of the men who accompanied us the whole time the Lord Jesus came and went among us,


beginning from the baptism of John until the day on which he was taken up from us, become with us a witness to his resurrection."


So they proposed two, Joseph called Barsabbas, who was also known as Justus, and Matthias.


Then they prayed, "You, Lord, who know the hearts of all, show which one of these two you have chosen


to take the place in this apostolic ministry from which Judas turned away to go to his own place."


Then they gave lots to them, and the lot fell upon Matthias, and he was counted with the eleven apostles.


There is no short answer, other than, “Because, I believe!”

You can’t present an argument that a protestant would accept, because protestants don’t accept Apostolic Succession.

Among the authority give to the apostles was the administration of the Church, which included replacing Apostles. And, as the Church grew, 12 men could not act as shepherds to the ever expanding flock. Bishops were named, and given the same pastoral and leadership positions as the apostles. This is what Apostolic Succession is all about.

Your protestant brother is going to want a clear and precise verse proving Apostolic Succession, just as they want a clear an precise verse on Peter being named the Pope, and the assumption of Mary.

If he could accept Peter as Pope, he would see that the selection of Matthias was quite legitimate, because Christ had given the keys to Peter, and it was Peter who called for his brother apostles to select a replacement.

We, Catholics, love and cherish the scripture as much as protestants, but we also accept Sacred Tradition, which addresses our beliefs, dogma, and doctrine not in scripture, but are still true.

The New Testament tells us that there were many thing that happened that could not be contained in all the books in the world, and this is just an example of 1 of them.

This kind of explains why the Church was Catholic, and Protestants spun off…there could have not been any protestants for nearly 50 to 70 years after the death of Christ, because the New Testament would not have been written yet, and how could a protestant believe what isn’t in the bible?

Peace and all good!

If you search Catholic Answers Forums for threads containing both “Paul” and “apostle,” you can find several which explore this and related questions. Here is a good one, I think:
CAF - Is Paul an Apostle?

From that, I found something that may give your sola scriptura friend more to think about:

1 Corinthians 15:3-8

For I handed on to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures; that he was buried; that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures; that he appeared to Cephas, then to the Twelve. After that, he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at once, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. After that he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. Last of all, as to one born abnormally, he appeared to me.

Cephas (aka Peter), then the Twelve, then all the apostles, then Paul. What does that tell you?

**Well, I replied to him with the info that you guys provided, Below is his response…
*you have a problem you your scriptural citation. cephas is part of the 12 but this passage seperates them, the 12 became apostles but this passage says “then” Jesus appeared to all the apostles. aren’t the 12 and the apostles the same. see your flow in thinking. btw, there is a good answer from the Greek text. you still haven’t given me the passage where Judas was saved and where Jesus appeared to the Matthias.

the above citation of “all” the apostlesdoes not say whetehr that is 11, 12 or more. romans 16 seems to indicate there were more than Just those, your argument is flawed

Romans 16:7 calss Andronicus and Junia Outstanding among the apostles. so, who is the reference in I Cor. 15 referring to. can you show me these two mentioned in romans 16:7 were with Jesus from the beginnian. again, your argument has flaws

what verse ever says judas was saved. what verse says Jesus apargued to Matthias*

Now, How would you reply to his response?

I think both things are possible, i.e. Cephas could have been in some sense separated from the 12, and Matthias could still have replaced Judas. Do you think that’s possible?

the 12 became apostles but this passage says “then” Jesus appeared to all the apostles.

1 Corinthians 15:5-7 says, “[Jesus] appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. … Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles.”

One possible reason is: the term “apostles” can refer to any missionary, not just the twelve.

aren’t the 12 and the apostles the same.

I think 1 Cor. 15:5-7 indicates that the two words are not identical in meaning.

btw, there is a good answer from the Greek text.

I am open to other answers. What do you think the answer is?

you still haven’t given me the passage where Judas was saved and where Jesus appeared to the Matthias.

I would respond: Who says Judas was saved? I don’t have any idea whether he was saved or not.

And who says Jesus had to *appear to Matthias? Why couldn’t Matthias just have seen Jesus when He was teaching in public? I think Acts 1:21-23 indicates that that’s how Matthias knew Jesus. Do you think that is a reasonable interpretation?

the above citation of “all” the apostlesdoes not say whetehr that is 11, 12 or more. romans 16 seems to indicate there were more than Just those, your argument is flawed

Romans 16:7 calss Andronicus and Junia Outstanding among the apostles. so, who is the reference in I Cor. 15 referring to. can you show me these two mentioned in romans 16:7 were with Jesus from the beginnian. again, your argument has flaws

I don’t think Romans 16:7 necessarily indicates that, because I think the term “the apostles” could refer to the twelve there. If I said I have a lawyer friend who is a man of note among judges, that wouldn’t mean he is a judge. Well, the Revised Standard Version translates this verse as saying “they are men of note among the apostles.” I don’t think that necessarily means they WERE apostles. What do you think?

Anyway, that would be my response. I hope you find it helpful. Always remember: in nonessentials, liberty. In essentials, unity. In all things, charity.



Peter would have to be speaking falsely in Acts 1:21-22 when he says it’s necessary to have one of the men who was a part of the company of disciples who were with Jesus throughout His ministry. St. Paul’s apostolate is very different, and he never claims otherwise. There is no scripture that says ‘Matthias was the wrong guy, Paul was number 12’ - this is one of those unbiblical assumption that Protestants insert in between the lines eh en they run into Church teaching - in this case, Peter’s authority to declare t hat the apostolic must be filled, the qualifications for filling it, and the method by which the qualified candidate is chosen.
Insist on being shown the verse that says that Peter was speaking & acting falsely.

Well, Scripture makes it abundantly clear that Paul is an apostle (see Rom 1:1, Rom 11:13, 1 Cor 1:1-2, 1 Cor 15:9, 2 Cor 1:1, Gal 1:1, Eph 1:1, Col 1:1, 1 Tim 1:1, 1 Tim 2:7, 2 Tim 1:1, 2 Tim 1:11, Titus 1:1).

In fact, Scripture also names the following as apostles: Epaphroditus (Phil 2:25), Barnabas (Acts 14:13), Andronicus and Junias (Rom 16:7).

We also see Peter referred to as an apostle: 1 Pet 1:1, 2 Pet 1:1, but also referenced separately from the apostles: 1 Cor 9:5.

Actually, even Jesus is called an apostle: Heb 3:1, Eph 2:20.

Paul also indicates that his apostleship isn’t a position or office, but is a calling, as he says he is an apostle to some, but not to others (1 Cor 9:2), and often refers to his apostleship as * to the Gentiles* (Rom 11:13, 2 Tim 1:11, 1 Tim 2:7), whereas others have apostleship of the circumcision (Gal 2:8).

This makes more sense when you understand the word “apostle” comes from the Greek “apostolos” which means “messenger, person sent forth.” (

The apostles were emissaries, and this calling is derived from the Great Commission given by Christ to go out and teach all nations. He is the chief apostle because He alone brought the Gospel to the world, and inasmuch as we act as apostles, emissaries, we act * in Christ*, as in all things.

And as to this calling, it is often implied in Scripture that apostleship is a calling, one among many, that belongs to many Christians according to God’s choosing (1 Cor 12:28-29, Eph 4:11). Indeed, this implication is reinforced by the talk of false apostles (2 Cor 11:13, Rev 2:2), which wouldn’t make sense if there were only the twelve.

But what about the Twelve? These are the Twelve Apostles who were called by Jesus during His ministry, and Matthias who was elected after the betrayal of Judas. This is a distinct group. After Jesus, they were the first apostles (emissaries) of Jesus, and as the foundation apostles (Rev 21:14), they had to have been eyewitnesses to all that Jesus said and did during His ministry (Acts 1:21-22) in order to fulfill the Great Commission through oral tradition (and letters).

These twelve are a unique group and are:

sometimes referred to as “the twelve apostles” (Mat 10:2, Luke 9:1, Luke 22:14, Rev 21:14);

sometimes referred to as “the twelve disciples” (Mat 20:17, Mat 10:1, Mat 11:1, Mat 26:20, Luke 6:13);

and very often referred to as simply “the twelve” (Mat 26:14, Mat 26:47, Mark 4:10, Mark 6:7, Mark 9:34, Mark 10:32, Mark 11:11, Mark 14:10, Mark 14:17, Mark 14:20, Mark 14:43, Luke 8:1, Luke 9:12, Luke 18:31, Luke 22:3, Luke 22:47, John 6:68, John 6:72, John 20:24, Acts 6:2, James 1:1)

Of course, this foundation on “the twelve” is in direct reference to the foundation of the Church as the new Israel, as the old Israel was founded upon twelve tribes or patriarchs (Gen 25:16, Gen 49:28, Exo 24:4, Exo 28:21, Exo 39:14, Ecc 44:26, Eze 47:13, Jos 3:12, Numb 17:2, Mat 19:28, Luke 22:30, Acts 26:7, James 1:1, Rev 21:12, Acts 7:8).

Indeed, we see a direct correlation between the twelve tribes and the twelve apostles as Israel in the following two passages:

1 Kings 18:31 - And he took **twelve stones **according to the number of the tribes of the sons of Jacob, to whom the word of the Lord came, saying: Israel shall be thy name.

Rev 21:14-21 - And** the wall of the city had twelve foundations**, and in them, the twelve names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb…] And the **foundations of the wall of the city were adorned with all manner of precious stones. **The first foundation was jasper: the second, sapphire: the third, a chalcedony: the fourth, an emerald: [20] The fifth, sardonyx: the sixth, sardius: the seventh, chrysolite: the eighth, beryl: the ninth, a topaz: the tenth, a chrysoprasus: the eleventh, a jacinth: the twelfth, an amethyst. And the twelve gates are twelve pearls, one to each: and every several gate was of one several pearl.

It is clear from Scripture that Paul was never counted as one of the Twelve, though Matthias was. Read Rev 21:21 again. Note: “every several gate” and “one several pearl.” This is a mystical account. There is a plurality in unity spoken of here. That is to say, the twelve are the foundation of the Church, and whatever sharing in the callings and graces of the Church that we receive from Christ (such as apostleship) comes to us through the Twelve, the foundation of the Church, where Christ is the Chief Cornerstone.

Thus, Paul and Epaphroditus and Barnabas (who had been considered for the position among the Twelve, but was not counted as such) and Andronicus and Junias are all apostles, but they are not counted among the Twelve.

Tell him: “The Bible says that Matthias was chosen by The Holy Spirit. Since you disagree with what the Bible says, I’m afraid I’m going to have to believe The Bible rather than you.”

Matthias – Not Paul – Replaced Judas

On the day of Pentecost, there were about 120 believers gathered together in the Upper Room when the Spirit descended upon them all. The people of Jerusalem wondered what all the noise was about, and “Peter stood up with the Eleven.” (cf. Acts 2:14)

IOW, 12 men stood up to witness to the crowds: Peter and “the Eleven” - not Peter and “the Ten”. Remember, Judas Iscariot was dead, and Matthias had been elected by the Holy Spirit to fill the vacancy as recorded in Acts 1:26: “Then they cast lots, and the lot fell to Matthias; so he was added to the eleven apostles.”

Matthias became one of the Twelve.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit