And in those days Peter stood up in the midst of the disciples (altogether the number of names was about a hundred and twenty), and said, "Men and brethren, this Scripture had to be fulfilled, which the Holy Spirit spoke before by the mouth of David concerning Judas, who became a guide to those who arrested Jesus; for he was numbered with us and obtained a part in this ministry… For it is written in the Book of Psalms: 'LET HIS DWELLING PLACE BE DESOLATE, AND LET NO ONE LIVE IN IT'; and, 'LET ANOTHER TAKE HIS OFFICE.' "Therefore, of these men who have accompanied us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, beginning from the baptism of John to that day when He was taken up from us, one of these must become a witness with us of His resurrection." And they proposed two: Joseph called Barsabas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias. And they prayed and said, "You, O Lord, who know the hearts of all, show which of these two You have chosen to take part in this ministry and apostleship from which Judas by transgression fell, that he might go to his own place." And they cast their lots, and the lot fell on Matthias. And he was numbered with the eleven apostles.
Acts 1:15-17, 20-26
Was it necessary and correct for the apostles to choose a replacement for Judas?
Were the qualifications for the replacement necessarily the correct qualifications?
Was narrowing the choice to two (Joseph Barsabas and Matthias) the right thing to do?
Was casting lots the way to make the final determination?
Was Matthias God’s choice?
To all five questions, I cannot say for sure. The number one reason we cannot say for sure is that one of the basic rules of “hermeneutics” (interpreting scripture) is “do not base doctrine on narratives.” Why? Because while the narratives in the Bible are all accurately recorded, not everyone in the Bible always did the right thing. Therefore unless other “didactic” (doctrinal instruction) scripture supports it, it may not be right.
There are two schools of thought on the selection of a replacement for Judas. One is that this was wrong because God’s choice to replace Judas was Paul. This is what I was taught as a new believer, and I taught this position myself many years ago. I no longer hold that position.
The other school of thought is that this was right and that God blessed it. This is the position I now hold. As to whether God’s choice was Paul, not Matthias, some discount Matthias because his name is not mentioned again in Acts. Neither are most of the other Apostles. In favor of Matthias instead of Paul is also the fact that Paul referred to himself as an apostle “born out of time.” This easily supports the idea that Paul was not one of the 12, though he was most certainly an apostle—a special Apostle.
When two opinions on the same passage are held by legitimate scholars, we must remain humble and not too dogmatic. This is especially true in this case, since it does not change the gospel or do violence to any other essential teaching in the scripture.