Acts 1:20 - Replacing Judas

Debunking Apostolic Succession

Acts 1:20–26 Does Not Prove Apostolic Succession

For it is written in the book of Psalms, Let his habitation be desolate, and let no man dwell therein: and his bishoprick let another take. Wherefore of these men which have companied with us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, Beginning from the baptism of John, unto that same day that he was taken up from us, must one be ordained to be a witness with us of his resurrection. And they appointed two, Joseph called Barsabas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias. And they prayed, and said, Thou, Lord, which knowest the hearts of all men, shew whether of these two thou hast chosen, That he may take part of this ministry and apostleship, from which Judas by transgression fell, that he might go to his own place. And they gave forth their lots; and the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was numbered with the eleven apostles.

Acts 1:20-26KJV

Acts 1 clearly shows that Judas' position was filled by Matthias. The apostles believed that Judas' office should not remain vacant, and Matthias became one of the Twelve. However, the passage does not prove that every apostle must always have a successor, that bishops inherit apostolic authority, or that there will be an unbroken line of successors until the end of the age.

Part 1 — A Closed, One-Time Event

Acts 1 describes a closed, one-time event, not a perpetual institution. 

Why Judas Specifically Was Replaced

REQUIREMENTS

The replacement had to meet two requirements (Acts 1:21–22): he had to have been with Jesus from John's baptism to the Ascension, and he had to be an eyewitness of the resurrection. Nobody after that first generation can meet those requirements. So the passage describes an office that closes, not one that gets passed down forever.

JUDAS' PROPHECY

Judas' replacement was tied to a unique prophetic circumstance. Acts 1:20 cites Psalm 109:8, "Let another take his office (peqûddâh)," showing that Matthias filled a vacancy specifically foretold in Scripture. The text says one man takes one office once. No line, no chain, no promise of perpetuity.

Let his days be few; and let another take his office.

Psalms 109:8KJV

RESTORING THE TWELVE

The primary reason for selecting Matthias was to maintain the number of 12 apostles, fulfilling Jesus' original appointment of 12 (Matthew 10:1–4; Luke 6:13–16). 

Jesus answered them, Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?

John 6:70KJV

Matthias restored the symbolic number of twelve apostles connected with the twelve tribes of Israel (Matthew 19:28; Luke 22:30). 

And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

Matthew 19:28KJV

That ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

Luke 22:30KJV

Once that was accomplished, Scripture never again instructs believers to maintain the number by replacing deceased apostles.

THE FOUNDATION

The apostles are called a "foundation", and you only lay a foundation once.

Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints, and of the household of God; And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;

Ephesians 2:19-20KJV

The apostles and prophets served as the church's foundation, while Christ is the cornerstone. Nothing in the text states that apostles would be continually replaced or that an unbroken line of successors would follow them. The emphasis is on the foundation already laid, not on a continuing succession.

For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.

1 Corinthians 3:11KJV

In Revelation the emphasis is on the twelve apostles of the Lamb, a unique and fixed group.

And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.

Revelation 21:14KJV

The New Jerusalem does not have an unlimited number of foundations bearing the names of successive bishops or later church leaders. It has twelve foundations with twelve apostolic names.

Why It Was Never Meant to Repeat

Now that we have seen why Judas was replaced, the next question is whether his replacement was meant to be a continuing pattern.

METHOD

The apostles chose Matthias by casting lots (Acts 1:26), an old-covenant method they never used again after the Spirit came at Pentecost. That marks it as a transitional moment, not a pattern.

NO COMMAND

The New Testament never commands the ongoing replacement of apostles. Matthias was chosen to fill one specific vacancy, but no passage instructs the church to continue appointing successors to the apostles after they died. The text records a one-time event, not an ongoing system.

NO REPLACEMENT

When James was killed by Herod in Acts 12:2, no successor was appointed. If apostles were meant to be continually replaced, this would have been the natural time to do so. Yet after James' martyrdom, Scripture records no effort to fill his position, there was no search for a candidate, no list of qualifications, no casting of lots, and no appointment of a replacement.

Part 2 — The Word "Bishoprick" Does Not Prove Succession

THE ARGUMENT FROM A SHARED WORD

Judas held an episkopē ("office"), and Matthias succeeded him. Since bishops also hold an episkopē (1 Tim. 3:1), some argue this shows a principle of succession in which apostolic authority continued through later bishops.

For it is written in the book of Psalms, Let his habitation be desolate, and let no man dwell therein: and his bishoprick [episkopē] let another take.

Acts 1:20KJV

This is a true saying, If a man desire the office of a bishop [episkopē], he desireth a good work.

1 Timothy 3:1KJV

Both verses use the same Greek word, episkopē. In Acts 1:20 it's translated "bishoprick," and in 1 Timothy 3:1 it's "the office of a bishop", same word in both places. The succession argument leans entirely on that shared word. To test it, we need to look at what the word actually means.

WHAT THE WORD MEANS

SAME WORD, DIFFERENT OFFICE

The shared word "bishoprick" does not prove that bishops inherit the apostolic office.

In Acts 1:20, episkopē just means the "office" or "position" Judas held. It is the context, not the word, that tells us this particular office was apostolic. The focus is on appointing a replacement for Judas within that specific ministry.

In 1 Timothy 3:1, however, episkopē describes the "office of a bishop" or "overseer," outlining the responsibilities and qualifications required for this role, essentially the episcopal office. Here, the emphasis is on the duties and standards of a bishop.

The word "bishoprick" in Acts 1:20 is just the Greek word for "office/charge," quoted from Psalm 109:8, not the later church office of bishop.

Let his days be few; and let another take his office (peqûddâh).

Psalms 109:8KJV

So that word simply means "oversight, charge, office." It's a general term for a position of responsibility, not a technical label for "the apostolic office." Two passages sharing this common word doesn't prove they're talking about the same office. It's like the word "office": a clerk and a king both hold an "office," but that does not means they have the same job. The word points to a function (oversight), not a rank.

DIFFERENT QUALIFICATIONS, DIFFERENT OFFICE

If using the same word meant it was the same office, then the qualifications should be the same too. But they are not. The Bible gives different qualifications for bishops/elders (1 Timothy 3; Titus 1) than it does for apostles (Acts 1:21–22).

• An apostle had to be an eyewitness of the resurrected Christ (Acts 1:21-22). A bishop/elder does not have that requirement.
• Apostles received direct revelation from Christ (Galatians 1:11-12). Bishops do not.
• Apostles laid the doctrinal foundation of the church (Ephesians 2:20). Bishops preserve and teach that foundation.

A bishop (episkopos) then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous; One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity; (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?)

1 Timothy 3:2-5KJV

These lists share nothing. One is a historical, unrepeatable requirement (they had to see the risen Christ). The other is ongoing moral character anyone in any generation can grow into. If these were the same office, why are the qualifications so different? Same label "oversight," two entirely different jobs.

THE BIBLE DISTINGUISHES A BISHOP FROM AN APOSTLE

In the New Testament, a bishop is the same as an elder. Paul uses the terms "elder" and "bishop" interchangeably to refer to the same men.

For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders (presbuteros) in every city, as I had appointed thee: If any be blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly. For a bishop (episkopos) must be blameless, as the steward of God; not selfwilled, not soon angry, not given to wine, no striker, not given to filthy lucre;

Titus 1:5-7KJV

In Acts 20 and 1 Peter 5, the same group of men are simultaneously described as:

• Elders (presbyteroi/presbuteros/sumpresbuteros)
• Overseers/Bishops (episkopoi/episkopos/episkopeō)
• Shepherds/Pastors (poimainō/poimēn)

And from Miletus he sent to Ephesus, and called the elders (presbuteros) of the church... Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers (episkopos), to feed (poimainō) the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.

Acts 20:17,28KJV

The elders which are among you I exhort, who am also an elder (sumpresbuteros), and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, and also a partaker of the glory that shall be revealed: Feed (poimainō) the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight (episkopeō) thereof, not by constraint, but willingly; not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind;

1 Peter 5:1-2KJV

Shepherds/Pastors

The Greek word poimēn is the noun, poimainō is the verb. They share the same root.

ποιμήν (poimēn) — "shepherd" (noun) The shepherd himself, the person.
The KJV almost always renders it "shepherd" (the shepherds at the nativity, Luke 2:8; Christ as "the good shepherd," John 10:11). The plural form is used in Ephesians 4:11 translated as "pastors." It is the same word, so a pastor is literally a shepherd.

ποιμαίνω (poimainō) — "to shepherd" (verb) This is the action of shepherding: to tend, to feed, to guide, and notably to rule.
The KJV usually gives it as "feed" (John 21:16; Acts 20:28; 1 Peter 5:2; Jude 12), but in Revelation it shifts to "rule", "he shall rule them with a rod of iron" (Rev 2:27; 12:5; 19:15). That dual range, tending and governing, is the heart of the word.

In the New Testament, elder, bishop/overseer, and pastor/shepherd refer to the same local church office viewed from different angles:

• Elder = the man's maturity.
• Bishop/Overseer = his responsibility to supervise.
• Pastor/Shepherd = his responsibility to care for and feed the flock.

So, the "office of a bishop" refers to the role of a local church elder or overseer, not the office of an apostle. Scripture treats these as different roles.

Apostles and pastors are listed as separate offices, showing that a bishop or pastor is not the same as an apostle.

And he gave some, apostles (apostolos); and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors (poimēn) and teachers;

Ephesians 4:11KJV

And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues.

1 Corinthians 12:28KJV

OVERSIGHT CONTINUES, APOSTLESHIP DOES NOT

The word "bishoprick" in both verses proves only that both involve oversight. It does not prove succession, and it does not give bishops apostolic authority. What a bishop does inherit is the task, shepherding a flock and guarding sound doctrine (1 Tim. 3:2, "apt to teach"; Titus 1:9). What he cannot inherit is what made an apostle an apostle: seeing the risen Lord and being commissioned directly by Him.

And they prayed, and said, Thou, Lord, which knowest the hearts of all men, shew whether of these two thou hast chosen,

Acts 1:24KJV

Paul's apostleship came straight from the risen Christ and the Father, not from apostolic succession.

Paul, an apostle, (not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead;)

Galatians 1:1KJV

What does carry forward is the teaching, not the apostolic authority. That's passing down sound doctrine, the line your ministry stands in, not apostolic rank.

And the things that thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also.

2 Timothy 2:2KJV

THE SAME WORD IS APPLIED TO JESUS

Here is the decisive point. The same word root, episkopos, is applied to Jesus Himself.

For ye were as sheep going astray; but are now returned unto the Shepherd and Bishop (episkopos) of your souls. 1 Peter 2:25

Psalm 23:1KJV

If sharing the word "bishop" transferred authority, a local bishop would be equal to Christ. The word simply describes someone who has oversight. It is used for Christ, for church elders, and for the position Judas left vacant.

So the reasoning behind the claim is an error: assuming that because two texts use the same word, they mean the exact same thing. Meaning comes from context, not from a matching word.

Apostolic succession is a man-made claim to authority. It assumes that bishops inherit the authority of the apostles, even though Scripture never teaches that apostolic authority is passed down from one generation to the next.