7

Jesus says in Matthew 19:28:

Jesus said to them, “Truly I tell you, in the renewal of all things, when the Son of Man sits on His glorious throne, you who have followed Me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

Shouldn't it be 11 thrones because Judas was a traitor and no longer a disciple?

Casanova
  • 181
  • 1
  • 5
  • 3
    Tacking the scope onto this question made it almost silly. You're just doing that to to avoid closure, not because it makes it a more interesting question to you or more intelligible to others. I'm going to roll back and migrate it to BH as a question about why 12 was used in this context, not 11 (which seems to be what you were after in the first place). If you have a question about Catholicism or any other theological tradition's beliefs about Judas, the disciples, the thrones, or whatever, feel free to ask about that directly, but don't just slap a sticker on a different kind of question. – Caleb Jun 03 '17 at 08:38
  • 1
    A more theological interpretation, or at least which requires a belief in the inspiration and ability of Jesus to predict such, would be that Judas was replaced, and another disciple took his 'office' of Apostle—"let his office another take", as quoted in Acts in reference to the validity of such a replacement by St. Peter. Namely, this 'new twelfth Apostle replacement' was Matthias. – Sola Gratia Jun 05 '17 at 17:45
  • I deleted my answer because you are now asking a different question. My answer was related to your addition of the word "promise" to what Jesus had said. You are now left with a question that can only have one answer, "Yes". I'm not sure what assertion you believe Jesus made, but it is clear to me that he asserted that there were twelve thrones awaiting any of the disciples who wanted to sit on them. Judas didn't want to do that, since there were others things he wanted to do, which are recorded for anyone who wants to read about them. – enegue Jun 06 '17 at 12:41

4 Answers4

3

It should not be 11. Twelve is the correct number. The promise for some present to sit on the twelve thrones, as marked by the Hebrew "amen, amen" which translated into "certainly!", did not refer to Judas. More than the Twelve Apostles were present at this gathering. We know this from Acts 1:15ff. When Peter stands before the 120, he states they must replace Judas with a disciple who had been present for all of Jesus' earthly ministry-from the baptism by John until the Ascension (Acts 1:21, 22).

Of the 120, two met those criteria: Joseph Barsabbas (called Justus) and Matthias (vs. 23). When the lots were cast, it fell upon Matthias as the Lord's choice to take the place of Judas as one of the Twelve (vs. 26). Assuming Judas' place as one of the Twelve, he would then be granted one of the thrones to sit upon mentioned in Matthew 19:28.

Frank Luke
  • 22,300
  • 16
  • 84
  • 134
  • Was Jesus present when the election happened? – Casanova Jun 07 '17 at 18:44
  • As the omnipresent Son of God, yes, but that's a theological answer. He had ascended prior to this. Matthias and Justus followed throughout the ministry, so would have been present when OP verse was stated. – Frank Luke Jun 07 '17 at 19:25
  • So it was not Jesus who chose Matthias? – Casanova Jun 07 '17 at 19:35
  • 2
    It was the ascended Jesus working through the Holy Spirit. The disciples prayed that the lot would fall upon the chosen one. I do believe they had a way for the lot to return "none of the above," but that's not on topic for this question. – Frank Luke Jun 07 '17 at 20:04
0

I think that the phrase "you who have followed Me" is critical here. Jesus doesn't specifically refer to the people who were then counted as Apostles.

This is critical in two respects. First, based on Acts 1, Matthias was evidently present at the time.

Also, based on John 6:70, Jesus was evidently aware of Judas's eventual betrayal, so He probably didn't have Judas in mind here.

EJoshuaS - Stand with Ukraine
  • 2,077
  • 4
  • 26
  • 58
-1

The Bible is unclear as to the fate of Judas Iscariot. If he went to "his own place" that could clearly neither be heaven nor hell. Given the infinite forgiveness afforded to all believers, he might well have subsequently been redeemed. After all, Peter denied Jesus three times, yet current theology has him as gatekeeper for entry into heaven.

Rob m
  • 1
  • John 17:12 cf. John 6:37-40 would show Judas to have perished eternally, so his fate is clear after all. – Cork88 Apr 02 '23 at 01:50
-3

Well we know that another disciple was appointed to replace Judas. I believe it was Matthias whom the disciples chose to replace Judas as covered in Acts 1:12-26 he was also known as Barsabbas and had been with the twelve from the time of John the baptist and had been witness to the resurrection which was one of the criteria the disciples stated this replacement was to have. Judas was not a witness to the resurrection as far as we know. But then we also have Paul who is called one of the twelve Apostles who although he did not witness the physical resurrection of Jesus he did encounter the risen Christ in a bright light and heard his voice which was enough to change Saul to Paul and we see the results of his conversion recorded in scripture. Admittedly there is some dispute throughout the Synoptic gospels to who this twelfth disciple was traditionally he was called St Jude but Mark names him as Thaddaeus some manuscripts of Matthew name him as Thaddaeus some manuscripts of Matthew name him as Lebbaeus some some manuscripts of Matthew name him as Judas the Zealot and Luke names him as Judas, son of James and the Gospel of John name him as Judas (not Iscariot) lol so are we any clearer perhaps not,lol.

Alan White
  • 3
  • 1