 |  |
21: 25), we must be careful in dismissing Acts 1: 26 as the last use of this miracle
which testified to the Jews who practiced it that they had God's approval and were His
people. Certainly the last reference to lots is in Acts 1: 26 and although it may have been
used elsewhere during the Acts period, there is no record of it. However at
Acts.xxviii.26-28 the people of Israel were set aside by God and salvation was then sent
directly to the Gentiles, independently of the Jews. Then, from that time, the people of
Israel ceased to be a nation in covenant relation with God, they became lo-ammi, not my
people (Hosea 1: 9). Thus the privileges of such a covenant position were put into
abeyance and then the miracle of lots and the Urim and Thummim would have ceased.
Naturally there is no record of them in any of the epistles written after the end of the Acts
period (Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, Philemon, Titus, I & II Timothy) and for the
Gentiles of this dispensation to attempt to copy a Jewish practice of a previous
dispensation is not only folly, but also dangerous, yet it can creep up unawares.
"Shall I send my friend this Christian tract? I will write to him. If his reply comes
back on a Monday, a Wednesday or a Friday--I'll send it to him! If on another day, I
won't."
This incident is not fiction, it is fact. It actually happened. Sadly some Christians
indulge in such practices, not being aware that at best it is mere superstition and failure to
use our God given wisdom and responsibility and at worst . . . . . they could be allowing
themselves to be influenced by "seducing spirits and the doctrines of demons", words
addressed to Christian believers, not unbelievers, in I Tim. 4: 1.
Lastly there is the view that the disciples of Acts 1: 15 were too hasty in replacing
Judas. If they had waited, the right man, Paul, would have appeared. Such a view is
totally wrong as Paul did not have the qualification of being with the Lord from the time
of His baptism by John to His ascension (John 15: 27 and Acts 1: 22). Paul probably
never even met our Lord when He was on earth. Also such criticism fails to appreciate
that lots was a divinely appointed method for making judicial decisions and that that
decision was confirmed by the Holy Spirit filling all of them, including Matthias
(Acts.ii.4). In I Cor. 15: 5 Paul himself speaks of "the twelve" as separate from himself
and this testifies to the correctness of Matthias' appointment. Lastly:
"The idea that Paul was divinely intended to be the twelfth, and that the apostles here
wrongly anticipated God's plan, betrays a misunderstanding of the unique character of
Paul's apostleship" (New Bible Commentary Revised).
The twelve were the twelve apostles for the Jews. They "shall sit upon twelve
thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel" (Matt. 19: 28). Paul, on the other hand, was
"the apostle of the gentiles" (Rom. 11: 13) and as such could have no place as one of the
twelve.