Well, not necessarily. Have you ever followed Peter's history, chronologically, throughout the Gospels? It would be extremely difficult to show that his instigation of the seating of Matthias was promoted by The Holy Ghost, especially that no move in that specific direction by The Lord Jesus Christ was even hinted during his 40-day perambulations amongst over 500 brethren, teaching, preaching, firecting. One would think some mention would have been made in Scripture if Jesus had authorized that. Actually by its absence the negative is suggested. Reading the account leads one to surmise that Christ had His own plan, and the time was not yet ripe for Him to have shared what that was.
Remember that in the 9-10 day interval they had the promise of God in the Spirit, but He had not yet arrived. They had neither the direct counsel of the Risen Christ nor of the Holy Ghost. Nowhere is it suggested that they had any other supernatural prodding to do anything but to wait for the direction of the promised Paraclete, another Comforter and Didaskalos of the same kind as The Christ.
It is almost impossible to suppress the notion that Peter really ran true to known character, taking the bit in his teeth, jumping to claim the yearned-for but as-not-yet-granted role of dominance, engaging in the kind of actions whose impetuousness almost undid the whole plan of the Godhead for the salvation of mankind, precisely at a critical moment.
Note that in this interval, not one follower was yet regenerated. Furthermore, Peter's interpretation and application of the particular scripture, combined with an unapproved selection process, showed a deviation from Biblical hermeneutics. It is without question that the whole human-invented uninvited meddling was not overseen by Holy Spirit guidance. Did they ask the Lord as to whether or not they were to be engaging in this enterprise? No. Did they obey Christ's command to wait for the arrival Director of Operations? No. Had they not presumptuously already been pushed into this in the most delicate formative stage, without any heavenly direction? Yes. Did they leave the Godhead out of the preliminary selection process? Yes. They only sought God's participation, and then only to take the blame for the choice limited to only one of the two they had already preselected. Was any of their desperate enemies like, say Saul of Tarsus, even remotely considered for their selectiion pool? No.
In the end, the only other primary apostle directly chosen, inducted, and personally discipled by Christ was Saul. And what everybody has missed is that both Matthias and Barsabas, though having companied with the primary disciples, had already been deselected by The Christ for the closest innermost group of trainees. If either had been satisfactory for Judas' replacements, why did not Christ choose them in his 40-day contact with them? It seems to be very certain that neither were yet destined for that honor, ne?
Is this just blindfolded dart-throwing? No -- but I think the eleven were playing this role, whilst they were not trusting in the Lord with all their hearts, but leaning on their own understanding, and not acknowledging the Lord in this matter, nor allowing Him to take the initiative. They were being wise in their own eyes, and insensibly falling into error. Furthermore, after this other, wiser, more Scripturally prudent were chosen as ruling elders in the Jerusalem church.
However! Think what Holy Ghost power came upon those assembled believer-disciples on that first Pentecost-church day! Especially how the headstrong, presumptuous, disloyal, imprudent Simon The Petros (little rock) mightily proclaimed the resounding foundational massive rock-ledge (Petra) Truth, personified in Jesus: "Thou art the Christ, Son of The Living God!"
What a transformation! And the apostles, all having the capability of binding or loosing, saw Satan bound and 3,000 believer-disciple souls immersed and let into the local church that day!
Well, not necessarily. Have you ever followed Peter's history, chronologically, throughout the Gospels? It would be extremely difficult to show that his instigation of the seating of Matthias was promoted by The Holy Ghost, especially that no move in that specific direction by The Lord Jesus Christ was even hinted during his 40-day perambulations amongst over 500 brethren, teaching, preaching, firecting. One would think some mention would have been made in Scripture if Jesus had authorized that. Actually by its absence the negative is suggested. Reading the account leads one to surmise that Christ had His own plan, and the time was not yet ripe for Him to have shared what that was.
That does not follow from the effort that Jesus made to create His Church and the painstaking teaching over and over of the 12 and the disciples. If you read Acts 2, you will see the effect that the Holy Spirit had upon Peter and his newfound leadership.
However! Think what Holy Ghost power came upon those assembled believer-disciples on that first Pentecost-church day! Especially how the headstrong, presumptuous, disloyal, imprudent Simon The Petros (little rock) mightily proclaimed the resounding foundational massive rock-ledge (Petra) Truth, personified in Jesus: "Thou art the Christ, Son of The Living God!"
The Protestants we fence with have the opinion that Peter was a stumbling, bumbling fool and to a certain extent, they are correct. The Peter that we see in Acts and in his Epistles are a testimonial to the effect of the Holy Spirit upon a fallible man.