Who is the 12th Apostle on the Foundation Stone? - Paul, Barnabas, Matthias, or Judas

moral necessity · #1 (**permalink**) 01-16-2008, 07:22 PM

In Revelation 21:14, who's name is on the 12th stone as an apostle? Has anyone's study led them to lean towards one over the others?

panta dokimazete · #2 (**permalink**) 01-16-2008, 07:48 PM

How would it not be Paul?

Southern Presbyterian · #3 (**permalink**) 01-16-2008, 09:25 PM

Matthias.

See (or rather listen) HERE for my reasoning.

MeanieCalvinist · #4 (**permalink**) 01-16-2008, 09:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Southern Presbyterian

Matthias.

See (or rather listen) HERE for my reasoning.

Co 15:1 Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand;
1Co 15:2 By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain.
1Co 15:3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;
1Co 15:4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:
1Co 15:5 And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve:
1Co 15:6 After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep.
1Co 15:7 After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles.
1Co 15:8 And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time.
1Co 15:9 For I am the least of the apostles, that am not meet to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God.

Paul distinguishes Himself from the twelve here.

turmeric · #5 (**permalink**) 01-16-2008, 09:49 PM

It's not Judas - another took his office in fulfillment of Ps.109.

PuritanCovenanter · #6 (**permalink**) 01-16-2008, 09:56 PM

Paul was hand picked by Christ to be an Apostle. I am not so sure that the casting of lots is being hand picked by Christ. Not every thing the Apostles did was infallible. The Scriptures are but they were not.

Albeit Brian has a passage that seems to indicate he is correct.

Augusta · #7 (**permalink**) 01-16-2008, 10:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PuritanCovenanter

Paul was hand picked by Christ to be an Apostle. I am not so sure that the casting of lots is being hand picked by Christ. Not every thing the Apostles did was infallible. The Scriptures are but they were not.

Albeit Brian has a passage that seems to indicate he is correct.

The casting of lots was like what they did in the old testament with the Urim and the Thummim. This is why some puritans thought all lot casting, without the purpose of seeking God's will, like gambling and other games of chance was "testing God."

PuritanCovenanter · #8 (**permalink**) 01-16-2008, 10:09 PM

Here is what Gill says.

Quote:

then of the twelve; though there were then but eleven of them, Judas being gone from them, and having destroyed himself; and at the first appearance of Christ to them, there were but ten present, Thomas being absent; and yet because their original number, when first chosen and called, were twelve, they still went by the same name; see Joh_20:24. The appearance or appearances here referred to are those in Joh_20:19. The Vulgate Latin reads the "eleven"; and so the Claromontane exemplar.

(g) Apud Euseb. Eccl. Hist. l. 1. c. 12.

Jamieson, Fausset, Brown

Quote:

1Co 15:5 - seen of Cephas--Peter (Luk_24:34).

the twelve--The round number for "the Eleven" (Luk_24:33, Luk_24:36). "The Twelve" was their ordinary appellation, even when their number was not full. However, very possibly Matthias was present (Act_1:22-23). Some of the oldest manuscripts and versions read, "the Eleven": but the best on the whole, "the Twelve."

PuritanCovenanter · #9 (**permalink**) 01-16-2008, 10:32 PM

Calvin.

Quote:

.

5. That he was seen by Cephas He now brings forward eye witnesses, (αὐτόπτας) as they are called by Luke, (Luke 1:2,) who saw the accomplishment of what the Scriptures had foretold would take place. He does not, however, adduce them all, for he makes no mention of women. When, therefore, he says that he appeared first to Peter, you are to understand by this that he is put before all the men, so that there is nothing inconsistent with this in the statement of Mark (Mark 16:9) that he appeared to Mary.

But how is it that he says, that he appeared to the twelve, when, after the death of Judas, there were only eleven remaining? Chrysostom is of opinion that this took place after Matthias had been chosen in his room. Others have chosen rather to correct the expression, looking upon it as a mistake. But as we know, that there were twelve in number that were set apart by Christ’s appointment, though one of them had been expunged from the roll, there is no absurdity in supposing that the name was retained. On this principle, there was a body of men at Rome that were called Centumviri, while they were in number 102. By the twelve, therefore, you are simply to understand the chosen Apostles.

Semper Fidelis · #10 (**permalink**) 01-16-2008, 10:35 PM

Does this really have to be understood, literally, that there will be stones with names on them?

I prefer Calvin's commentary on this verse.

moral necessity · #11 (**permalink**) 01-16-2008, 10:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SemperFideles

Does this really have to be understood, literally, that there will be stones with names on them?

I prefer Calvin's commentary on this verse.

Do you mean his commentary on this verse in Revelation, or the one mentioned in the post before yours?

fredtgreco · #12 (**permalink**) 01-16-2008, 11:45 PM

It would have to be on one mentioned in the previous post, because Calvin never wrote a commentary on Revelation.

Semper Fidelis · #13 (**permalink**) 01-17-2008, 01:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fredtgreco

It would have to be on one mentioned in the previous post, because Calvin never wrote a commentary on Revelation.

Exactly.

Daniel Ritchie · #14 (**permalink**) 01-17-2008, 05:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fredtgreco

It would have to be on one mentioned in the previous post, because Calvin never wrote a commentary on Revelation.

Wise man. He didn't understand it.

moral necessity · #15 (**permalink**) 01-17-2008, 11:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SemperFideles

Quote:

Originally Posted by fredtgreco

It would have to be on one mentioned in the previous post, because Calvin never wrote a commentary on Revelation.

Exactly.

I realized Calvin didn't write a commentary on Revelation, but I figured he might have referenced the verse in Rev. Ch. 20:14 in one of his other commentaries, or perhaps in his sermons, that are either in print or out of print, and that I have not come across yet.

Blessings!

Semper Fidelis · #16 (**permalink**) 01-17-2008, 05:44 PM

Didn't mean to offend. I was just playing around.

moral necessity · #17 (**permalink**) 01-17-2008, 07:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SemperFideles

Didn't mean to offend. I was just playing around.

Thanks, but not to worry...I took it in the best of light! My question to you wasn't phrased as well as it could have been anyway!

Blessings!

VirginiaHuguenot · #18 (**permalink**) 01-17-2008, 09:37 PM

FWIW, I don't think it is necessary to dwell on the question of which specific apostle's name fills the number twelve slot. I think the reference to "the names of the Lamb's twelve Apostles" is a reference that is intended to suggest completeness, with respect to the company of the Apostles and the doctrine that the preached.

I think, perhaps, a passage worth noting in this regard to the meaning of completeness is Gen. 42.13, 32:

Quote:

13 And they said, Thy servants are twelve brethren, the sons of one man in the land of Canaan; and, behold, the youngest is this day with our father, and one is not.

We be twelve brethren, sons of our father; one is not, and the youngest is this day with our father in the land of Canaan.

Here the patriarchs refer to themselves (those speaking in the first text being unaware that Joseph stood before them) as being of the number twelve though not all were thought to be alive or present. It is the number that signifies the complete group of brethren though the group present was not complete.

James Durham, Commentary Upon the Book of Revelation, p. 976:

Quote:

Followeth, (ver. 14) the foundations: more excellent than that of Solomon's Temple of cedar-wood and stone. It hath twelve foundations: this signifieth the durableness and eternity of that city, that no time can make it decay, more than any enemy can storm it; it is well founded, not having one foundation only, but twelve for its security.

A word is added to the foundations (as formerly to the gates) the names of the Lamb's twelve Apostles are written on them. By twelve, is understood all: in a word, here their Doctrine which they preached is meant, (as Eph. 2.20. where the Church is built on the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles) which Word endureth for ever, 1 Pet. 1.25. and so God's faithfulness sustaineth heaven that it is never moved, but endureth to all eternity according to that Word and Gospel which was preached through the world by all the Apostles: yea, the Prophets and Ministers of Christ; But the Apostles, for honor's sake, are mentioned for all. And this is not inconsistent with heaven to have their names on the foundation, seeing they are not the foundations themselves, but the faithfulness of God in the preached Gospel shall be more manifest then nor now; and His Ministers in that Jerusalem shall have a special dignity, as founders or builders use to have their names graven on the walls for their honor.

Arthur Dent, The Ruin of Rome; Or, An Exposition Upon the Whole Revelation, p. 394:

Quote:

And in every gate the name of an apoftle, fo that all the gates had the names of the Lamb's twelve apoftles, to fignify that the ground and foundation of this city is laid upon the 'doctrine of the apoftles and prophets, Jefus Chrift himfelf being the chief corner-ftone,' Eph. ii. 20.

G.K. Beale, The Book of Revelation: A Commentary on the Greek Text, pp. 1070-1071:

Quote:

Therefore, "twenty-four" has the idea of completeness (2 x 12) of the representation of God's people before God's presence in the temple...

Comparison of 21:14 with Eph. 2:20 reveals a striking similarity. In Ephesians also the apostles are pictured as forming part of the "foundation" [] of the "holy temple," which is the church. Together with the apostolic foundation are "prophets," along with Christ, the "cornerstone."

F. Nigel Lee, John's Revelation Unveiled:

Quote:

Sixth. It is also true that the Church Militant here on this present Earth -- is founded on the 'Canon' alias the Measuring-Rod of God's Holy Word. This means the Older Testament's teachings of the 'twelve' Patriarchal Tribes of the children of Israel, and the Newer Testament's teachings of the 'twelve' Apostles of the Lamb -- as all reflected in the twenty-four heavenly Elders.

This is so -- even though the Tribes and Apostles are not exactly twelve each. It is again so -- even though they themselves are not literalistically the gates and the foundations of that heavenly city.

holyfool33 · #19 (**permalink**) 03-19-2008, 09:03 PM

It's Paul

ServantofGod · #20 (**permalink**) 03-19-2008, 09:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by holyfool33

It's Paul

Expound please...