Apostolic Succession

[cottice]

Quote:
Originally Posted by cottice
I really hate to muddy the alleged “crystal clearness” nere but please look at Rev 21:14 and tell us how there can be more that 12 apostles? For you see, Scripture calls Paul an Apostle of Jesus Christ about ten or so times. So you have the eleven + Matthias + Paul = twelve. Is this the new math I have heard about? I say eleven + Matthias + Paul = thirteen and that contradicts Rev 21:14 and therefore is one apostle too many. Now , how “crystal clear” is that?

catholic.com/blog/jimmy-akin/how-many-apostles-were-there

Response from me:

“Sorry, I am not impressed. See my responses on another thread regarding what the Catechism says. I think the catechism is more authoratative than Jimmy Akin.”

Here, I made it easy for you: This is the post of YADA and my response to him on this very subject that I referred to immediately above:

Quote:
Originally Posted by YADA
Really - your argument has been addressed - Paul is an apostle but he is never in Scripture identified as one of the Twelve Apostles - not once and in fact as has been quoted to you - the Scriptures have Paul appearing before The Twelve … Paul cannot be one of the Twelve and appear before the Twelve.

I find nothing in Revelation that argues for Paul over Matthias …

Also - you make much of the use of the Twelve and the Eleven without the word apostle following … IMHO you are doing gymnastics in order to deny the meaning of the passage being related to the Twelve Apostles - or the Eleven Apostles when Peter [or Judas ] being absent o[r Peter being identified along with the Eleven] is clearly the persons referenced …

Also - you have never offered any Catholic Tradition, Theologian, Early Church Father nor official Catholic document in support of your personal biblical interpretation that is in opposition to the Teaching authority of the Church and Catholic understanding …even though you have been asked several times …

You have offered nothing about your education that would lead one to accept your interpretation over the hundreds of theologians through the centuries that concluded Matthias was chosen to replace Judas and be numbered as one of the Twelve Apostles - absolutely zero …

So let me ask you - Who is in error here, you or scripture plus the teaching authority of the Catholic Church, 2000 years of Tradition, and very educated Scripture Scholars and Catholic Theologians?

My response to YADA was as follows:

I offered you the divinely inspired Word of God as written in the scriptures and THAT is not good enough for you??? And for your information the Church has never made any dogmatic statement about any alleged apostleship of Matthias but the Catechism does call Paul an Apostle. Please refer to the following paragraphs:

1277,1616, 2636,1825, 2515, 2196, 2632, 402, 659 and 639.

I especially like the wording of para 2632 where the Cathechism calls Paul, “the apostle par excellence”. Those were the entries I found for “Apostle Paul.” When I use “Apostle Matthias” I get the following:

“No documents match the query.”

So I change my search criteria to just, “Matthias” and I get this:

“No documents match the query.”

Poor Matthias, the Catechism doesn’t even mention him. Now you wanted an “official Catholic document” and I submit to you that the Catechism of the Catholic Church is an “official Catholic Document”. You got your wish.

But there is more. The Catechism also says this in Para 1575:

“1575 Christ himself chose the apostles and gave them a share in his mission and authority. Raised to the Father’s right hand, he has not forsaken his flock but he keeps it under his constant protection through the apostles, and guides it still through these same pastors who continue his work today. Thus, it is Christ whose gift it is that some be apostles, others pastors. He continues to act through the bishops.”

Well now seems we have a problem here. The Catechism says Christ, Himself choose the Apostles. But what’s more it was Christ who gave them a share of His ministry. Now was Matthias chosen by “Christ, Himself”? Did Matthias receive his ministry from Christ?
No Matthias was chosen by the eleven apostles andreceived what authority he had from them when they “laid hands” on him.

There is more also:

The Catechism goes on to say this about bishops:

"The bishops - successors of the apostles

861 "In order that the mission entrusted to them might be continued after their death, [the apostles] consigned, by will and testament, as it were, to their immediate collaborators the duty of completing and consolidating the work they had begun, urging them to tend to the whole flock, in which the Holy Spirit had appointed them to shepherd the Church of God. They accordingly designated such men and then made the ruling that likewise on their death other proven men should take over their ministry."374

862 "Just as the office which the Lord confided to Peter alone, as first of the apostles, destined to be transmitted to his successors, is a permanent one, so also endures the office, which the apostles received, of shepherding the Church, a charge destined to be exercised without interruption by the sacred order of bishops."375 Hence the Church teaches that "the bishops have by divine institution taken the place of the apostles as pastors of the Church, in such wise that whoever listens to them is listening to Christ and whoever despises them despises Christ and him who sent Christ."376

Is that enough? If not there is one more:

"869 The Church is apostolic. She is built on a lasting foundation: “the twelve apostles of the Lamb” (Rev 21:14). She is indestructible (cf. Mt 16:18). She is upheld infallibly in the truth: Christ governs her through Peter and the other apostles, who are present in their successors, the Pope and the college of bishops.

 

[YADA]

Sorry, I am not impressed. See my responses on another thread regarding what the Catechism says. I think the catechism is more authoratative than Jimmy Akin.

It would if the Catechism was directly addressing this issue - sadly for you - it is not.

The Catechism does not say that Matthias was not selected to replace Judas the Apostle

The Catechism is addressing the apostleship of Paul - it does not state that Paul is listed as one of the Twelve Apostles …

You are still reading your interpretation into every mention of apostle and respect for Paul … thus equating the apostleship of Paul with Paul being the 12th Apostle …

And Revelation does not list the 12 Apostles by name - you are reading Paul into that list

 

[steve_b]

Response from me:

“Sorry, I am not impressed. See my responses on another thread regarding what the Catechism says. I think the catechism is more authoratative than Jimmy Akin.”

Here, I made it easy for you: This is the post of YADA and my response to him on this very subject that I referred to immediately above:

Quote:
Originally Posted by YADA
Really - your argument has been addressed - Paul is an apostle but he is never in Scripture identified as one of the Twelve Apostles - not once and in fact as has been quoted to you - the Scriptures have Paul appearing before The Twelve … Paul cannot be one of the Twelve and appear before the Twelve.

I find nothing in Revelation that argues for Paul over Matthias …

Also - you make much of the use of the Twelve and the Eleven without the word apostle following … IMHO you are doing gymnastics in order to deny the meaning of the passage being related to the Twelve Apostles - or the Eleven Apostles when Peter [or Judas ] being absent o[r Peter being identified along with the Eleven] is clearly the persons referenced …

Also - you have never offered any Catholic Tradition, Theologian, Early Church Father nor official Catholic document in support of your personal biblical interpretation that is in opposition to the Teaching authority of the Church and Catholic understanding …even though you have been asked several times …

You have offered nothing about your education that would lead one to accept your interpretation over the hundreds of theologians through the centuries that concluded Matthias was chosen to replace Judas and be numbered as one of the Twelve Apostles - absolutely zero …

So let me ask you - Who is in error here, you or scripture plus the teaching authority of the Catholic Church, 2000 years of Tradition, and very educated Scripture Scholars and Catholic Theologians?

My response to YADA was as follows:

I offered you the divinely inspired Word of God as written in the scriptures and THAT is not good enough for you??? And for your information the Church has never made any dogmatic statement about any alleged apostleship of Matthias but the Catechism does call Paul an Apostle. Please refer to the following paragraphs:

1277,1616, 2636,1825, 2515, 2196, 2632, 402, 659 and 639.

I especially like the wording of para 2632 where the Cathechism calls Paul, “the apostle par excellence”. Those were the entries I found for “Apostle Paul.” When I use “Apostle Matthias” I get the following:

“No documents match the query.”

So I change my search criteria to just, “Matthias” and I get this:

“No documents match the query.”

Poor Matthias, the Catechism doesn’t even mention him. Now you wanted an “official Catholic document” and I submit to you that the Catechism of the Catholic Church is an “official Catholic Document”. You got your wish.

But there is more. The Catechism also says this in Para 1575:

“1575 Christ himself chose the apostles and gave them a share in his mission and authority. Raised to the Father’s right hand, he has not forsaken his flock but he keeps it under his constant protection through the apostles, and guides it still through these same pastors who continue his work today. Thus, it is Christ whose gift it is that some be apostles, others pastors. He continues to act through the bishops.”

Well now seems we have a problem here. The Catechism says Christ, Himself choose the Apostles. But what’s more it was Christ who gave them a share of His ministry. Now was Matthias chosen by “Christ, Himself”? Did Matthias receive his ministry from Christ?
No Matthias was chosen by the eleven apostles andreceived what authority he had from them when they “laid hands” on him.

There is more also:

The Catechism goes on to say this about bishops:

"The bishops - successors of the apostles

861 "In order that the mission entrusted to them might be continued after their death, [the apostles] consigned, by will and testament, as it were, to their immediate collaborators the duty of completing and consolidating the work they had begun, urging them to tend to the whole flock, in which the Holy Spirit had appointed them to shepherd the Church of God. They accordingly designated such men and then made the ruling that likewise on their death other proven men should take over their ministry."374

862 "Just as the office which the Lord confided to Peter alone, as first of the apostles, destined to be transmitted to his successors, is a permanent one, so also endures the office, which the apostles received, of shepherding the Church, a charge destined to be exercised without interruption by the sacred order of bishops."375 Hence the Church teaches that "the bishops have by divine institution taken the place of the apostles as pastors of the Church, in such wise that whoever listens to them is listening to Christ and whoever despises them despises Christ and him who sent Christ."376

Is that enough? If not there is one more:

"869 The Church is apostolic. She is built on a lasting foundation: “the twelve apostles of the Lamb” (Rev 21:14). She is indestructible (cf. Mt 16:18). She is upheld infallibly in the truth: Christ governs her through Peter and the other apostles, who are present in their successors, the Pope and the college of bishops.

You are the one putting the qualification on 12, correct?.

“Two disciples, Joseph, called Barsabas, and Matthias were selected, and lots were drawn, with the result in favor of Matthias, who thus became associated with the eleven Apostles.”

So Matthias was added to the 11. Matthias, Apostle, Saint

 

[Randy_Carson]

ERROR ALERT

I don’t think so. First of all, if you look back in the posts some people were arguing for there being more than twelve Apostles. They included Barnabas, Paul Matthias and somepne included the 70 disciples. Very early on I argued that we should differentiate between the generic meaning of apostle and the specific meaning of Apostle. But no one wanted to hear of it. People clung to Acts 1:24 like a leaded life preserver. But Revelation 21:14 seals the deal. There are only twelve Apostles, not thirteen, not fourteen, not any other number. Just twelve. I have shown where Paul was called by and sent by and where Paul was called an Apostle of Jesus Christ, not once but several times in scripture. Scripture does not call Matthias an Apostle not like it does Paul.

As has been shown in other threads, Jimmy Akin addresses all of your errors in a masterful way here:

How Many Apostles Were There?
by Jimmy Akin
jimmyakin.com/2014/03/how-many-apostles-were-there.html

First, the New Testament does not present Matthias’s election as invalid. It presents it in a straight-forward way with the ultimate conclusion that Matthias “was enrolled with the eleven apostles” (Acts 1:26).

Second, the New Testament does not have to record an apostle as having “done something” for him to be an apostle. The New Testament records next to nothing—or, depending on how you identify different biblical figures—it event records nothing at all about what some of the apostles did. Yet it explicitly names them as apostles.

Third, if the New Testament does not record Matthias as having done anything, the Church Fathers do. For example, Eusebius records that Matthias was noted for preaching self-control to avoid sexual immorality. According to Eusebius:

But they say that Matthias also taught in the same manner that we ought to fight against and abuse the flesh, and not give way to it for the sake of pleasure, but strengthen the soul by faith and knowledge [Ecclesiastical History III:29].

Fourth, if the claim were to be made on Protestant premises then it would have to be defensible by sola scriptura—the claim that we should be able to prove theological points “by Scripture alone.” Yet there seems to be no place in Scripture requiring there to be only twelve living apostles.

Instead, the New Testament treats both Matthias and Paul as valid apostles.​

So, yes, there were 12 foundations in Revelation 21:14, and Paul is not one of them.

Finally, you do know that Matthias is listed by the USCCB as the twelfth Apostle, right? Yeah, because I already told you this.

 

[Randy_Carson]

**BENEDICT XVI

GENERAL AUDIENCE**

Saint Peter’s Square
Wednesday, 18 October 2006

Judas Iscariot and Matthias

Dear Brothers and Sisters,

Today, concluding our walk through the portrait gallery of the Apostles called directly by Jesus during his earthly life, we cannot fail to mention the one who has always been named last in the list of the Twelve: Judas Iscariot. We want to associate him with the person who is later elected to substitute him, Matthias.

…

**In conclusion, we want to remember he who, after Easter, was elected in place of the betrayer. In the Church of Jerusalem two were proposed to the community, and then lots were cast for their names: “Joseph called Barsabbas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias” (Acts 1: 23).

Precisely the latter was chosen, hence, “he was enrolled with the eleven apostles” (Acts 1: 26). **We know nothing else about him, if not that he had been a witness to all Jesus’ earthly events (cf. Acts 1: 21-22), remaining faithful to him to the end. To the greatness of his fidelity was later added the divine call to take the place of Judas, almost compensating for his betrayal.

vatican.va//holy_father/benedict_xvi/audiences/2006/documents/hf_ben-xvi_aud_20061018_en.html

 

[cottice]

It would if the Catechism was directly addressing this issue - sadly for you - it is not.

The Catechism does not say that Matthias was not selected to replace Judas the Apostle

The Catechism is addressing the apostleship of Paul - it does not state that Paul is listed as one of the Twelve Apostles …

You are still reading your interpretation into every mention of apostle and respect for Paul … thus equating the apostleship of Paul with Paul being the 12th Apostle …

And Revelation does not list the 12 Apostles by name - you are reading Paul into that list

You are beating a strawman unmercifully to death. I never stated that the Catechism said that Matthias was not selected to replace Judas the Apostle. I did state that the Catechism did say Paul was an Apostle. In fact calling him an apostle “par excellance”. Nor did I state that Revelation listed the Aposltrles by name. Now let’s let the poor strawman alone and respond to what I did say and not what you would have liked me to say. Okay?

 

[Randy_Carson]

BENEDICT XVI

GENERAL AUDIENCE

Wednesday, 10 May 2006

Having a "vision from on high’

Dear Brothers and Sisters,

At the last two Audiences we meditated on what Tradition in the Church is and we saw that it is the permanent presence of the word and life of Jesus among his people. But in order to be present, the word needs a person, a witness.

And so it is that this reciprocity comes about: on the one hand, the word needs the person, but on the other, the person, the witness, is bound to the word, entrusted to him and not invented by him. This reciprocity between the content - the Word of God, life of the Lord - and the person who carries on the work is characteristic of the Church’s structure. Let us meditate today on this personal aspect of the Church.

The Lord founded the Church, as we have seen, by calling together the Twelve, who were to represent the future People of God. Faithful to the Lord’s mandate, after his Ascension, the Twelve first made up their number by appointing Matthias in Judas’ place (cf. Acts 1: 15-26), thereby continuing to involve others in the duties entrusted to them so that they might continue their ministry.

The Risen Lord himself called Paul (cf. Gal 1: 1), but Paul, although he was called by the Lord to be an Apostle, compared his Gospel with the Gospel of the Twelve (cf. ibid., 1: 18), and was concerned to transmit what he had received (cf. I Cor 11: 23; 15: 3-4). In the distribution of missionary tasks, he was associated with the Apostles together with others, for example, Barnabas (cf. Gal 2: 9).

Just as becoming an Apostle begins with being called and sent out by the Risen One, so the subsequent call and sending out to others was to be brought about, through the power of the Spirit, by those who are already ordained in the apostolic ministry. And this is the way in which this ministry, known from the second generation as the episcopal ministry, episcope, was to be continued.

Perhaps it would be useful to explain briefly what “Bishop” means. It is the Italian form of the Greek term, “episcopos”. This word means one who has a vision from on high, who looks with the heart. This is what St Peter himself calls Jesus in his First Letter: bishop, “Shepherd and Guardian of your souls” (I Pt 2: 25).

And according to this new model of the Lord, who was the first Bishop, Guardian and Pastor of souls, the successors of the Apostles were later called Bishops, “episcopoi”. The role of “episcope” was entrusted to them. This specific role of the Bishop was gradually to evolve, in comparison with the origins, until it took the form - already clearly attested to by Ignatius of Antioch at the beginning of the second century (cf. Ad Magnesios, 6, 1: PG 5, 668) - of the threefold office of Bishop, Priest and Deacon.

This development was guided by God’s Spirit who helps the Church in the discernment of the authentic forms of Apostolic Succession, ever more clearly defined among the plurality of experiences and charismatic and ministerial forms present in the earliest communities.

In this way, succession in the role of Bishop is presented as the continuity of the Apostolic ministry, a guarantee of the permanence of the Apostolic Tradition, word and life, entrusted to us by the Lord. The link between the College of Bishops and the original community of the Apostles is understood above all in the line of historical continuity.

As we have seen, first Matthias, then Paul, then Barnabas joined the Twelve, then others, until, in the second and third generations, the Bishop’s ministry took shape.

 

[cottice]

You are the one putting the qualification on 12, correct?.

“Two disciples, Joseph, called Barsabas, and Matthias were selected, and lots were drawn, with the result in favor of Matthias, who thus became associated with the eleven Apostles.”

So Matthias was added to the 11. Matthias, Apostle, Saint

This is getting laughable. It really is. Look, I don’t care if Matthias is, “numbered with the eleven Apostles”, “counted with the eleven Apostles”, “enrolled with the eleven Apostles” or “associated with the eleven Apostles”. **THERE ARE STILL ELEVEN APOSTLES ** Eleven before Matthias and eleven after Matthias.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Let’s boil this down so that no one can possibly miss it:

BENEDICT XVI
GENERAL AUDIENCE
Wednesday, 10 May 2006

“Faithful to the Lord’s mandate, after his Ascension, the Twelve first made up their number by appointing Matthias in Judas’ place…first Matthias, then Paul, then Barnabas joined the Twelve.…”

End. Of. Discussion.

 

[cottice]

BENEDICT XVI

GENERAL AUDIENCE

Wednesday, 10 May 2006

Having a "vision from on high’

Dear Brothers and Sisters,

At the last two Audiences we meditated on what Tradition in the Church is and we saw that it is the permanent presence of the word and life of Jesus among his people. But in order to be present, the word needs a person, a witness.

And so it is that this reciprocity comes about: on the one hand, the word needs the person, but on the other, the person, the witness, is bound to the word, entrusted to him and not invented by him. This reciprocity between the content - the Word of God, life of the Lord - and the person who carries on the work is characteristic of the Church’s structure. Let us meditate today on this personal aspect of the Church.

The Lord founded the Church, as we have seen, by calling together the Twelve, who were to represent the future People of God. Faithful to the Lord’s mandate, after his Ascension, the Twelve first made up their number by appointing Matthias in Judas’ place (cf. Acts 1: 15-26), thereby continuing to involve others in the duties entrusted to them so that they might continue their ministry.

The Risen Lord himself called Paul (cf. Gal 1: 1), but Paul, although he was called by the Lord to be an Apostle, compared his Gospel with the Gospel of the Twelve (cf. ibid., 1: 18), and was concerned to transmit what he had received (cf. I Cor 11: 23; 15: 3-4). In the distribution of missionary tasks, he was associated with the Apostles together with others, for example, Barnabas (cf. Gal 2: 9).

Just as becoming an Apostle begins with being called and sent out by the Risen One, so the subsequent call and sending out to others was to be brought about, through the power of the Spirit, by those who are already ordained in the apostolic ministry. And this is the way in which this ministry, known from the second generation as the episcopal ministry, episcope, was to be continued.

Perhaps it would be useful to explain briefly what “Bishop” means. It is the Italian form of the Greek term, “episcopos”. This word means one who has a vision from on high, who looks with the heart. This is what St Peter himself calls Jesus in his First Letter: bishop, “Shepherd and Guardian of your souls” (I Pt 2: 25).

And according to this new model of the Lord, who was the first Bishop, Guardian and Pastor of souls, the successors of the Apostles were later called Bishops, “episcopoi”. The role of “episcope” was entrusted to them. This specific role of the Bishop was gradually to evolve, in comparison with the origins, until it took the form - already clearly attested to by Ignatius of Antioch at the beginning of the second century (cf. Ad Magnesios, 6, 1: PG 5, 668) - of the threefold office of Bishop, Priest and Deacon.

This development was guided by God’s Spirit who helps the Church in the discernment of the authentic forms of Apostolic Succession, ever more clearly defined among the plurality of experiences and charismatic and ministerial forms present in the earliest communities.

In this way, succession in the role of Bishop is presented as the continuity of the Apostolic ministry, a guarantee of the permanence of the Apostolic Tradition, word and life, entrusted to us by the Lord. The link between the College of Bishops and the original community of the Apostles is understood above all in the line of historical continuity.

As we have seen, first Matthias, then Paul, then Barnabas joined the Twelve, then others, until, in the second and third generations, the Bishop’s ministry took shape.

Randy, I agree wholeheartedly with Pope Benedict XVI. I really do. You see he does not say that Matthias was an Apostle. What he does say is ‘… the Twelve first made up their number by appointing Matthias in Judas’ place." That does not mean apostle. But notice what he also says, "Just as becoming an Apostle begins with being called and sent out by the Risen One so the subsequent call and sending out to others was to be brought about, through the power of the Spirit, by those who are already ordained in the apostolic ministry. And this is the way in which this ministry, known from the second generation as the episcopal ministry, episcope, was to be continued."

BINGO

There you go Randy, Matthias wasn’t called by or sent by the Risen One as Benedict says is the beginning of becomimg an apostle. He is the first of what Pope Benedict calls the "second generation’ or the episcopal ministry which was to continue on after the Apostles. That is what Ihave been saying all along. You wanted me to provide a Church authority to back my case and you unwittingly did it yourself without even knowing it. Thank you, you saved me some time. Now could you show me how your scenario of having more than 12 apostles does not contradict Rev 21:14? I would really like to read it.

 

[ericc]

This is getting laughable. It really is. Look, I don’t care if Matthias is, “numbered with the eleven Apostles”, “counted with the eleven Apostles”, “enrolled with the eleven Apostles” or “associated with the eleven Apostles”. **THERE ARE STILL ELEVEN APOSTLES ** Eleven before Matthias and eleven after Matthias.

In Acts 2:14, Matthias is already in the Twelve. Peter with the Eleven. That makes twelve. If Matthias wasn’t there, it would have been Peter with the Ten. In 1 Cor 15:5 the Twelve is mentioned again.

But I told you that before elsewhere and you kept quiet. But here I am again!

 

[cottice]

In Acts 2:14, Matthias is already in the Twelve. Peter with the Eleven. That makes twelve. If Matthias wasn’t there, it would have been Peter with the Ten. In 1 Cor 15:5 the Twelve is mentioned again.

But I told you that before elsewhere and you kept quiet. But here I am again!

Oh Eric, if only that verse says Peter with the other eleven Apostles then I would believe you but unfortunately for you it doesn’t. Sorry, but the word apostle is not in that verse. You added it. You’re beating a dead horse.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Randy, I agree wholeheartedly with Pope Benedict XVI. I really do. You see he does not say that Matthias was an Apostle. What he does say is ‘… the Twelve first made up their number by appointing Matthias in Judas’ place." That does not mean apostle.

If the Twelve apostles are a man short and they ask the Holy Spirit who should join them, then yeah, Matthias is an apostle. He has a Feast Day. Churches are names St. Matthias the Apostle Catholic Church.

But notice what he also says, “Just as becoming an Apostle begins with being called and sent out by the Risen One so the subsequent call and sending out to others was to be brought about, through the power of the Spirit, by those who are already ordained in the apostolic ministry. And this is the way in which this ministry, known from the second generation as the episcopal ministry, episcope, was to be continued.”

Yes, I highligthted that in red for you and you took the bait. See, although the Pope recognized that Jesus called the Eleven and Paul later, the Holy Father called Matthias one of the twelve apostles anyway!

Notice the closing sentence of his audience which I also highlighted in red:

As we have seen, first Matthias, then Paul, then Barnabas joined the Twelve, then others, until, in the second and third generations, the Bishop’s ministry took shape.

First Matthias joined the Twelve Apostles to make up their number.
Then Paul.
Then Barnabas
And so on as scripture reveals (and Akin explains)

Paul is an apostle, but Matthias was one first and he, not Paul, filled the missing spot created by the suicide of Judas in order to round out the number Twelve.

There you go Randy, Matthias wasn’t called by or sent by the Risen One as Benedict says is the beginning of becomimg an apostle. He is the first of what Pope Benedict calls the "second generation’ or the episcopal ministry which was to continue on after the Apostles. That is what Ihave been saying all along. You wanted me to provide a Church authority to back my case and you unwittingly did it yourself without even knowing it. Thank you, you saved me some time.

No. I have just demonstrated how you twisted first scripture now the Pope’s words to fit your own strange opinion.

Now could you show me how your scenario of having more than 12 apostles does not contradict Rev 21:14? I would really like to read it.

I already did. Paul, like Barnabas, Timothy and others are “Tier 2” apostles. They aren’t among the Twelve.

The Eleven “made up their number” by adding Matthias. It would be YEARS before Paul was commissioned by the Church in Antioch in Acts 13.

One more point: you say that Jesus “sent” Paul in Acts 9? Where to? Jesus didn’t “send” him anywhere.

5 “Who are you, Lord?” Saul asked. “I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting,” he replied. 6 “Now get up and go into the city, and you will be told what you must do.”

Oh. I see. Jesus sent him into town to await further instructions. That’s being sent? That’s what it means to be an apostle?

And later, Paul was living in Tarsus doing NOTHING. Tell me: Do we have any “Letters to the Tarsusians” in the New Testament? No?

No. Because Paul did diddly-squat in terms of building up the Church there. There was no great Church of Tarsus that Paul was fond of visiting later in his life. Corinth? Sure. Ephesus? You bet. But Tarsus? :nope:

Paul accomplished nothing until Barnabas went and dragged him out of hiding and the Holy Spirit told the Church at Antioch (where Peter was) to lay hands on him.

Only then, did Paul begin to become the apostle we know today.

But by then, Matthias and the Eleven had been Apostles for many years building up the Church.

 

[cottice]

You are the one putting the qualification on 12, correct?.

“Two disciples, Joseph, called Barsabas, and Matthias were selected, and lots were drawn, with the result in favor of Matthias, who thus became associated with the eleven Apostles.”

So Matthias was added to the 11. Matthias, Apostle, Saint

No, scripture is the one putting the quantification on 12. You will find it in Rev 21:14. Twelve foundations of the Church (the New Jerusalem) on which are written the names of the twelve Apostles. HOW MANY APOSTLES? Twelve, not thirteen, not fourteen not eleven, just twelve apostles.

 

[cottice]

If the Twelve apostles are a man short and they ask the Holy Spirit who should join them, then yeah, Matthias is an apostle. He has a Feast Day. Churches are names St. Matthias the Apostle Catholic Church.

Yes, I highligthted that in red for you and you took the bait. See, although the Pope recognized that Jesus called the Eleven and Paul later, the Holy Father called Matthias one of the twelve apostles anyway!

Notice the closing sentence of his audience which I also highlighted in red:

As we have seen, first Matthias, then Paul, then Barnabas joined the Twelve, then others, until, in the second and third generations, the Bishop’s ministry took shape.

First Matthias joined the Twelve Apostles to make up their number.
Then Paul.
Then Barnabas
And so on as scripture reveals (and Akin explains)

Paul is an apostle, but Matthias was one first and he, not Paul, filled the missing spot created by the suicide of Judas in order to round out the number Twelve.

No. I have just demonstrated how you twisted first scripture now the Pope’s words to fit your own strange opinion.

I already did. Paul, like Barnabas, Timothy and others are “Tier 2” apostles. They aren’t among the Twelve.

The Eleven “made up their number” by adding Matthias. It would be YEARS before Paul was commissioned by the Church in Antioch in Acts 13.

Randy, before I respond to you I think it is fair that you respond to my prior request for you to justify your position in light of Rev 21:14. You have been avoiding that issue like the plague and maybe for good reason because perhaps you realize that like the plague you know it is lethal to your position. Suffice it to say Benedict did not say Matthias was an Apostle. Now I await your reply to my request regarding Rev 21:14.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Randy, before I respond to you I think it is fair that you respond to my prior request for you to justify your position in light of Rev 21:14. You have been avoiding that issue like the plague and maybe for good reason because perhaps you realize that like the plague you know it is lethal to your position. Suffice it to say Benedict did not say Matthias was an Apostle. Now I await your reply to my request regarding Rev 21:14.

Benedict is so clear on this that I’m shocked you continue to argue.

If you are at a dinner party and three people sit down to play bridge, one might call out, “cottice, come join us. We need a fourth.” A fourth WHAT, cottice? A fourth bridge player.

If the “Eleven” hold an election to make up their number, they need a twelfth. A twelfth what, cottice? A twelfth APOSTLE.

Benedict even goes to some lengths to address THE POSSIBLE CONFUSION THAT SOME MIGHT HAVE CONCERNING PAUL who is undoubtedly more famous than Matthias. Hey, Paul is more famous that ANY of the apostles with the possible exception of Peter. But notice what Benedict says:

The Risen Lord himself called Paul, but

But what, cottice? Benedict agrees with you concerning the calling of Paul. Heck, we ALL agree with you on that.

BUT

But Paul is not one of the Twelve. The Holy Father makes it clear that Matthias first, then Paul, then Barnabas ALL joined the Twelve as Apostles.

As for Revelation 21;14, any talk of whose names are on those stones is not based upon revelation but speculation. Heck, one of them could be a gravestone with Judas’ name for all we really know from Scripture.

However, based upon the Word of God, the consistent teaching of the Catholic Church and Pope Benedict, and the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, I choose the original Eleven plus Matthias who was selected by the Holy Spirit to be added to fill the office vacated by the apostle Judas Iscaiot.

If you want to choose Paul, be my guest.

 

[cottice]

Benedict is so clear on this that I’m shocked you continue to argue.

If you are at a dinner party and three people sit down to play bridge, one might call out, “cottice, come join us. We need a fourth.” A fourth WHAT, cottice? A fourth bridge player.

If the “Eleven” hold an election to make up their number, they need a twelfth. A twelfth what, cottice? A twelfth APOSTLE.

Benedict even goes to some lengths to address THE POSSIBLE CONFUSION THAT SOME MIGHT HAVE CONCERNING PAUL who is undoubtedly more famous than Matthias. Hey, Paul is more famous that ANY of the apostles with the possible exception of Peter. But notice what Benedict says:

The Risen Lord himself called Paul, but

But what, cottice? Benedict agrees with you concerning the calling of Paul. Heck, we ALL agree with you on that.

BUT

But Paul is not one of the Twelve. The Holy Father makes it clear that Matthias first, then Paul, then Barnabas ALL joined the Twelve as Apostles.

As for Revelation 21;14, any talk of whose names are on those stones is not based upon revelation but speculation. Heck, one of them could be a gravestone with Judas’ name for all we really know from Scripture.

However, based upon the Word of God, the consistent teaching of the Catholic Church and Pope Benedict, and the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, I choose the original Eleven plus Matthias who was selected by the Holy Spirit to be added to fill the office vacated by the apostle Judas Iscaiot.

If you want to choose Paul, be my guest.

What I want, Randy, is for you to respond to my post regarding Revelation 21:14. That verse limits the number of apostles to twelve. Now eleven are not in dispute. It is that twelfth one that is. I say it is Paul, The Catechism says it is Paul. Pope Benedicy XVI says it is Paul but you say no, it is Matthias. Do you reject Paul as an Apostle as I reject Matthias? Or do you have thirteen apostles where scripture says there are only twelve. The game is over Randy. You have to face up to it. You are faced with a contradiction in scripture. You have avoided Rev 21:14 all along but no more.

 

[Randy_Carson]

No, scripture is the one putting the quantification on 12. You will find it in Rev 21:14. Twelve foundations of the Church (the New Jerusalem) on which are written the names of the twelve Apostles. HOW MANY APOSTLES? Twelve, not thirteen, not fourteen not eleven, just twelve apostles.

Just Twelve, huh?

“Faithful to the Lord’s mandate, after his Ascension, **the Twelve first made up their number by appointing Matthias in Judas’ place…first Matthias **(12)****, then Paul (13), then Barnabas (14) joined the Twelve…”

Clearly, Benedict recognizes at least 14, not 12, apostles, cottice.

 

[cottice]

Just Twelve, huh?

Clearly, Benedict recognizes at least 14, not 12, apostles, cottice.

Revelation 21:14, Randy. Deal with it.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Revelation 21:14, Randy. Deal with it.

I did. Post #76. Hello?