check out this anti catholic blog

[PerryJ]

Paul appears to pass his office to Timothy in 2 Tim 4 1:6.

Paul was not outside of Apostolic Succession though. Jesus tell Paul that he will be informed what to do in Acts. He went to see Peter for 15 days in Jerusalem to confirm his calling. Fourteen years later he was confirmed by Peter, James and John.

Note the Church is perpetual, infalliable and indefectible. Matt 16:18, John 14:26 and 16:18. Why would the early Church change structure after the death of the Apostles (Bishops)? After the founding father of the US died did we go back to being a monarchy? No, the church was built upon Peter and continued with apostolic succession.

To follow up Peter showed succession as Matthias is in the count of Apostles. He replaced one. The story of Paul shows that Christ wasn’t held to the number twelve as he added Paul.

 

[TriuneUnity]

Paul appears to pass his office to Timothy in 2 Tim 4 1:6.

He does. The Office of the Ministry. The apostolic ministry, though, is distinct in numerous ways. Paul did not pass on the apostolic ministry.

Paul was not outside of Apostolic Succession though. Jesus tell Paul that he will be informed what to do in Acts. He went to see Peter for 15 days in Jerusalem to confirm his calling. Fourteen years later he was confirmed by Peter, James and John.

His confirmation, however, was not dependent on the 3 apostles in Jerusalem. It is only natural, right, and orderly, that Paul not operate outside of what the church itself was doing.

Note the Church is perpetual, infalliable and indefectible. Matt 16:18, John 14:26 and 16:18. Why would the early Church change structure after the death of the Apostles (Bishops)? After the founding father of the US died did we go back to being a monarchy? No, the church was built upon Peter and continued with apostolic succession.

I agree about the church being perpetual and indefectible. The apostles were infallible because they were given direct divine revelation. And no, we didn’t go back to being a monarchy; we went to neo-socialism LoL

 

[PerryJ]

His confirmation, however, was not dependent on the 3 apostles in Jerusalem. It is only natural, right, and orderly, that Paul not operate outside of what the church itself was doing.

If Paul felt it was necessary to work within the frame work of the Church how can we ignore that now? As Paul was ordained by Christ himself he would have the least reason to go to Peter and the others. He did it as you state to follow the order of the Church. Just as one should now follow the order of the Church. Even Paul was not above this heirarchy. Christ even stated he will be told what to do.

 

[TriuneUnity]

To follow up Peter showed succession as Matthias is in the count of Apostles. He replaced one. The story of Paul shows that Christ wasn’t held to the number twelve as he added Paul.

It’s also important to point out when Peter and the apostles recognized the need for a replacement for Judas, they did not appoint one themselves. They went to the existing congregation, which nominated two qualified candidates, prayed over them, and, by casting lots, left the final choice up to Lord. No ceremony of ordination or installation is reported.

 

[TriuneUnity]

If Paul felt it was necessary to work within the frame work of the Church how can we ignore that now?

We shouldn’t. Nor have I ever claimed we should.

 

[qui_est_ce]

By that theory then, there should only be 12 bishops in the world, one for each apostle.

If a governor dies in office, he’s not replaced by 30 governors in 30 different states and so on and so forth until they’re are several hundred governors which succeed an original 12. However, they are all successors of the gubernatorial system…which is how I would define modern presbyters as being part of the Office of the Ministry, which began with the 12
qui est ce;4110379:

Except that the country gets bigger and more states are added, more governors are needed. You know, the mustard seed the grows into a large tree.
TriuneUnity;4110417:

Yeah, indeed…the whole world. I don’t deny that the church succeeds the apostles in the ministry. I just don’t quantify it according to a rite or laying on of hands but rather, whether the church and its ministers continue to teach apostolic doctrine.

Do you concede your theory of 12 has been refuted?

If a particular presbyter or bishop begins to teach false doctrine it frankly doesn’t matter anymore who ordained that person. They’re no longer successors to the apostolic ministry.

And how is that determined? There were a lot of false doctrines in the early church even before the NT was written. I believe Gnosticism is mentioned in Thessalonians. The early Church quelled a lot of heretics: Aranianism, Donatism, etc. post-death of the last Apostle. At some point one must submit to an authority or there would be complete chaos. I think Protestantism is in Chaos. The Episcopals are in chaos. How many different theologies are out there now?

Although I agree Orthodox Lutheranism such as LCMS and WES has a lot of truth. They’re splitting and splitting.

Even the language has become misunderstood. Sacrament, Ordinance, Elect, Born again, OSAS, Regeneration, denomination.

Anglicans call their splits “communions.” I don’t know what Baptists call their different denominations, "conventions?’

What do Lutherans call them? All claiming to follow Martin Luther.

Reformed, Presbyterians, all claiming to follow Calvin.

There are to many “flavors” of religion out there. They make a mockery of Jesus’ words that we should remain one in Him, that He would not leave us orphans, but send us His Advocate.

 

[TriuneUnity]

Do you concede your theory of 12 has been refuted?

No. Because I was tracking that using Perry’s argument, which wasn’t related to what you were addressing. The fact remains that the apostolic ministry was limited to the apostolic period. The apostles were part of an order which was only for them and died with them. It is a particular subset of the overall ministry which all disciples are a part of.

And how is that determined? There were a lot of false doctrines in the early church even before the NT was written. I believe Gnosticism is mentioned in Thessalonians. The early Church quelled a lot of heretics: Aranianism, Donatism, etc. post-death of the last Apostle. At some point one must submit to an authority or there would be complete chaos. I think Protestantism is in Chaos. The Episcopals are in chaos. How many different theologies are out there now?

It is determined using the teachings of the apostles. It doesn’t take much of a genius to know that those things which are modern inventions such as what the Episcopalians are doing with homosexuality is opposed to apostolic teaching.

Although I agree Orthodox Lutheranism such as LCMS and WES has a lot of truth. They’re splitting and splitting.

The Lutheran Church is defined by the Lutheran Confessions. Individual church bodies such as the LCMS and the WELS, are federations of congregations that adhere to those confessions. They haven’t split yet, but if they do, they are no less Lutheran as long as they adhere to the confessions of our faith.

 

[PerryJ]

We shouldn’t. Nor have I ever claimed we should.

I agree I haven’t heard you state it.

A distinction from my point of view is we are not talking about the invisible Church that many Protestants proclaim. Paul is following the militant Church. To me this means following the Catholic Church as it was defined by the Bible and Peter himself.

 

[mercygate]

I won’t go too much into this one as the thread has already changed topics about 40 times LOL. Matthias replacing Judas does not prove apostolic succession since Matthias wasn’t a successor to the apostles; he was an apostle. The passage shows that the apostolic ministry was to remain at 12 members. There are, of course, those who would say that Matthias wasn’t truly an apostle as it was merely a human method used by the 11 and God really replaced Judas with Paul. I won’t go there, though lol.

How was Matthias an “apostle” except by being “an eyewitness?” He was not one of the 12 chosen by Jesus, and attained the title “Apostle” only by being joined to them by casting lots.

As for “human method” – it was the Levitical ‘method’. So it’s not exactly “human.”

 

[PerryJ]

No. Because I was tracking that using Perry’s argument, which wasn’t related to what you were addressing. The fact remains that the apostolic ministry was limited to the apostolic period. The apostles were part of an order which was only for them and died with them. It is a particular subset of the overall ministry which all disciples are a part of.

Why does it die with them? Matthias shows succession. Paul shows that twelve wasn’t a magical number. Parts of the Bible weren’t even written prior to Peter’s death. The Bible certainly wasn’t created yet. Why would it die with them?

If it was to die with them why wouldn’t Paul just have become the 12th Apostle ordained by Christ. They would continue as it was and move forward. Why add to it? They add to it because Matthias was showing succession.

 

[TriuneUnity]

I agree I haven’t heard you state it.

A distinction from my point of view is we are not talking about the invisible Church that many Protestants proclaim. Paul is following the militant Church. To me this means following the Catholic Church as it was defined by the Bible and Peter himself.

Well, of course I realize that you hold that the orthodox church is the Roman Catholic Church. I can’t change your mind about that one, nor would I particularly try, at least in an internet forum.

I would hold that churches which hold to the faith as expressed in the Lutheran confessions to be that orthodox visible church. I suppose we just have to approach any discussion from that perspective to try and meet somewhere in the middle.

 

[PerryJ]

How was Matthias an “apostle” except by being “an eyewitness?” He was not one of the 12 chosen by Jesus, and attained the title “Apostle” only by being joined to them by casting lots.

As for “human method” – it was the Levitical ‘method’. So it’s not exactly “human.”

Acts states he was numbered as one of the Eleven. He became an apostle. His joining was ordained by God according to scripture.

 

[TriuneUnity]

How was Matthias an “apostle” except by being “an eyewitness?” He was not one of the 12 chosen by Jesus, and attained the title “Apostle” only by being joined to them by casting lots.

As for “human method” – it was the Levitical ‘method’. So it’s not exactly “human.”

Acts states he was numbered among the eleven. That would make him an apostle. If the Lord was behind his choosing via lots than you could say he was chosen by Jesus. If you want to argue that he wasn’t an apostle, I wouldn’t engage in that because I am not familiar with those arguments. As I stated, many argue that Paul really replaced Judas.

 

[PerryJ]

Well, of course I realize that you hold that the orthodox church is the Roman Catholic Church. I can’t change your mind about that one, nor would I particularly try, at least in an internet forum.

I would hold that churches which hold to the faith as expressed in the Lutheran confessions to be that orthodox visible church. I suppose we just have to approach any discussion from that perspective to try and meet somewhere in the middle.

This maybe off subject: but we hold the mystical Church different than the visible Church. People can be within the mystical Church and be saved; however, for one to be part of the visible Church one would have to have apostolic succession.

 

[TriuneUnity]

Why does it die with them? Matthias shows succession. Paul shows that twelve wasn’t a magical number. Parts of the Bible weren’t even written prior to Peter’s death. The Bible certainly wasn’t created yet. Why would it die with them?

If it was to die with them why wouldn’t Paul just have become the 12th Apostle ordained by Christ. They would continue as it was and move forward. Why add to it? They add to it because Matthias was showing succession.

The church is built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets (Eph 2:20). This is said of no one else. The twelve apostles have a special relation to Israel in time and in eternity (Mt 19:28,Ga1 2:7-9). This is not true of other New Testament ministers.

The Apostles are distinguished from all other ministers of the gospel by being given the special title of Apostle by Jesus, by having a unique role as a foundation of the church, by being assigned a special role as leaders of Israel, and by being specially designated witnesses of Jesus’ resurrection.

They are distinguished from subsequent ministers of the gospel by a direct call from Christ, by the special gifts of healing and power over demons, and by the gift of inspiration. These gifts were, however, shared with contemporaries of the apostles, who were in direct contact with Christ or the apostles. With the possible exception of Ananias, only the apostles were able give these gifts to others.

No one since that time has possessed these qualities. Therefore, the death of John is the end of the earthly apostolic ministry. The foundation has been laid; those of us who are here now are building it up using the teachings they have left behind.

 

[TriuneUnity]

This maybe off subject: but we hold the mystical Church different than the visible Church. People can be within the mystical Church and be saved; however, for one to be part of the visible Church one would have to have apostolic succession.

Though you are using different qualifications than I (apostolic succession), I would agree wholeheartedly with your statement.

 

[PerryJ]

The church is built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets (Eph 2:20). This is said of no one else. The twelve apostles have a special relation to Israel in time and in eternity (Mt 19:28,Ga1 2:7-9). This is not true of other New Testament ministers.

The Apostles are distinguished from all other ministers of the gospel by being given the special title of Apostle by Jesus, by having a unique role as a foundation of the church, by being assigned a special role as leaders of Israel, and by being specially designated witnesses of Jesus’ resurrection.

They are distinguished from subsequent ministers of the gospel by a direct call from Christ, by the special gifts of healing and power over demons, and by the gift of inspiration. These gifts were, however, shared with contemporaries of the apostles, who were in direct contact with Christ or the apostles. With the possible exception of Ananias, only the apostles were able give these gifts to others.

No one since that time has possessed these qualities. Therefore, the death of John is the end of the earthly apostolic ministry. The foundation has been laid; those of us who are here now are building it up using the teachings they have left behind.

Matthias title wasn’t given directly by Jesus.

I agree that the foundation of the Church is based upon the Apostles one of which succeeded Judas after his death. From my point of view this scripture supports succession.

I agree that there were different levels of hiearchy within the Church at the earliests of time. At times the level appeared a bit confusing; however, bishop etc are defined. Judas was named a bishop and as such all other apostles would also be bishops.

 

[TriuneUnity]

Matthias title wasn’t given directly by Jesus.

If you approach it from the perspective that the casting of lots resulted in God’s appointment of Matthias as one of the 12 then in that sense he was given the title by Christ.

I agree that the foundation of the Church is based upon the Apostles one of which succeeded Judas after his death. From my point of view this scripture supports succession.

Only if you draw the conclusion from the text that this event is somehow connected to ministry other than the apostolic ministry. It shows that Matthias was chosen as an apostle; it says nothing about anyone succeeding Matthias in apostolic ministry.

I agree that there were different levels of hiearchy within the Church at the earliests of time. At times the level appeared a bit confusing; however, bishop etc are defined. Judas was named a bishop and as such all other apostles would also be bishops.

By definition if the apostolic ministry was limited to those whom the apostles themselves referred to as apostles it would be impossible for them to have been succeeded. They were the only ones to hold that office then or now. In the case of bishops and other ministers they are overall successors to the Office of the Ministry; the office of the ministry encompasses all of the disciples, whether apostles or not.

Public ministry of the Word did not originate with the Apostles. The public ministry of the Word existed already in the Old Testament. Public proclamation of the word took place already before the Flood (Genesis 4:26, 2 Peter 2:5). We also encounter the public ministry of the priests and Levites, who received a public rite of ordination or installation into their ministry. The Old Testament prophets were called directly by God or anointed by another prophet, as Elisha was. Several of Jesus’ disciples entered the “public ministry” as disciples of John, and they continued to baptize after they had left John to follow Jesus (John 1:35, 4:2). They were baptizing before they became Apostles and before the great commission to baptize all nations was given in Matthew 28.

 

[qui_est_ce]

The church is built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets (Eph 2:20). This is said of no one else. The twelve apostles have a special relation to Israel in time and in eternity (Mt 19:28,Ga1 2:7-9). This is not true of other New Testament ministers.

The Apostles are distinguished from all other ministers of the gospel by being given the special title of Apostle by Jesus, by having a unique role as a foundation of the church, by being assigned a special role as leaders of Israel, and by being specially designated witnesses of Jesus’ resurrection.

They are distinguished from subsequent ministers of the gospel by a direct call from Christ, by the special gifts of healing and power over demons, and by the gift of inspiration. These gifts were, however, shared with contemporaries of the apostles, who were in direct contact with Christ or the apostles. With the possible exception of Ananias, only the apostles were able give these gifts to others.

No one since that time has possessed these qualities. Therefore, the death of John is the end of the earthly apostolic ministry. The foundation has been laid; those of us who are here now are building it up using the teachings they have left behind.

Theoretically, this would agree with the Catholic Church, because all revelation ceased with the death of the last Apostle. However, the keys to understand and interpret Scripture has to be given to the visible Church on earth. Otherwise you would have the chaos in Protestantism you have today. I would say most non-Catholic religions rely on the Magesterium for most of their doctrine, whether they realize it or not, because the Church has defended and protected Scripture throughout the ages. Until Luther came along, the CC was the sole rule of authority of Christiandom. Others before Luther had no following, so they died out. Luther rightly protested abuses by the clergy, but he went a step too far when he changed theology. I believe he regretted this at the end of his life, when he saw the chaos caused by lack of authority.

 

[TriuneUnity]

Theoretically, this would agree with the Catholic Church, because all revelation ceased with the death of the last Apostle. However, the keys to understand and interpret Scripture has to be given to the visible Church on earth.

No real disagreement here.

Otherwise you would have the chaos in Protestantism you have today.

Because they abandoned the teaching of sola scriptura as espoused by the Lutheran reformers.

I would say most non-Catholic religions rely on the Magesterium for most of their doctrine, whether they realize it or not, because the Church has defended and protected Scripture throughout the ages.

Luther himself didn’t disagree with this.

Until Luther came along, the CC was the sole rule of authority of Christiandom.

And therein lies the rub; Lutherans hold to sola scriptura. Roman Catholics hold to sola ecclesia.

Others before Luther had no following, so they died out. Luther rightly protested abuses by the clergy, but he went a step too far when he changed theology. I believe he regretted this at the end of his life, when he saw the chaos caused by lack of authority.

We have no lack of authority. Because other sects do, does not mean we do also.