If there apostolic succession why is it not mentioned in the scriptures?

  • Thread starter Thread starter guanophore
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
justasking4 said:
What i don’t see is the laying on of hands that makes one an apostle. Its not even mentioned in Acts 1:21-26
Click to expand...
Nobody said that’s what makes one an apostle. :rolleyes: Rather, the laying on of hands makes one a bishop, a priest, or a deacon.
 
justasking4:

You can clear up a lot of misunderstanding if you would answer (truthfully) this one question:

Where in the Bible is it written how the Church is to be organized?

Thanks

Robert
 
justasking4: do you believe that any human person here on present day visible Earth has any authority whatsoever in Christ’s church?
 
Jerry-Jet said:
justasking4: do you believe that any human person here on present day visible Earth has any authority whatsoever in Christ’s church?
Click to expand...
Amen! 👍 I ask him: Do you have a supervisor at work, or does everyone just read the company mission statement and then do what they think it means? (insert Jeopardy music here).

Christ’s peace.
 
Rbt_Southwell said:
justasking4:

You can clear up a lot of misunderstanding if you would answer (truthfully) this one question:

Where in the Bible is it written how the Church is to be organized?

Thanks

Robert
Click to expand...
Matt. 16:18 👍 Beyond that, nothing. So it was their call.
 
Rbt_Southwell said:
justasking4:

You can clear up a lot of misunderstanding if you would answer (truthfully) this one question:

Where in the Bible is it written how the Church is to be organized?

Thanks

Robert
Click to expand...
See I Timothy 3 is a good place to look.
 
justasking4 said:
Are you aware that Matthew 16:18 says nothing about apostolic succession?
Click to expand...
Matthew 16:18 on it’s own may not say anything about succession, but since when do we go by a single verse to understand Scriptures?

Matthew 16:18, when read in the context of Isaiah’s Eliakim certainly speaks of succession.
 
justasking4 said:
Are you aware that Matthew 16:18 says nothing about apostolic succession?
Click to expand...
The power to bind and loose. Christ said “Whatever” you bind on earth. Apostolic succession is generally considered, by most prominent, and some obscure, theologians to be contained within the realm of “whatever”.

Show me the scripture that quotes Christ as saying, “Whatever you bind on earth, except for Apostolic succession, is held bound”. Sola scriptura has its dangers.

Anyway, JA4, according to BibleSteve (BS), you are irretrievably messed up, because you had no JW guidance in your bible reading. So there. Don’t believe us Catholics? We’ll sic the Witnesses on you to tune you up. Do we look better now?
 
justasking4 said:
I thought someone said he founded the church there. If that is so, that is different that coming to Antioch.
Click to expand...
You are right, but it is hard for you to accept other information, since you reject the Apostolic Tradition. However, those of us who embrace the Apostolic succession know that he did indeed start a church there, and there has been an unbroken line of bishops succeeding Peter till the present day.
justasking4 said:
Do you have chapter and verse?
Click to expand...
Only the verse in Acts where he pronounces the verdict of the council, which is the job of the Biship. No, what information we have about James, brother of the Lord, Bishop of Jerusalem, comes again from the Apostolic succession that remains in Jerusalem in unbroken line to the present day. Since you reject the validity of this succession, it will not be possible for you to accept it as evidence of what the Church teaches as true.
justasking4 said:
What i don’t see is the laying on of hands that makes one an apostle. Its not even mentioned in Acts 1:21-26
Click to expand...
Jesus had more than one way of passing authority, and other gifts, however, the laying on of hands was normative. In the upper room, he breathed upon them…

We are not sure what they did to “enroll” Matthias as an Apostle. However, even if they did a laying on of hands, that is not what “makes one and Apostle”. What qualifies him is in the previous verses, and when the lots are drawn, it falls to Matthias. this meant, to the Apostles, that the Lord had already chosen Matthias. this is what continues in the Church to this day. The Church recognizes and ratifies (through the rite of ordination) someone who has already been called and chosen by God for that service.
 
justasking4 said:
Are you aware that Matthew 16:18 says nothing about apostolic succession?
Click to expand...
I am aware of no such thing! If you say this, then you don’t understand the Key of David, or the power and purpose of the Keys of the Kingdom!
 
guanophore said:
I am aware of no such thing! If you say this, then you don’t understand the Key of David, or the power and purpose of the Keys of the Kingdom!
Click to expand...
Does Jesus make any reference to David here? Do any of the other apostles in the NT?
 
po18guy said:
The power to bind and loose. Christ said “Whatever” you bind on earth. Apostolic succession is generally considered, by most prominent, and some obscure, theologians to be contained within the realm of “whatever”.

Show me the scripture that quotes Christ as saying, “Whatever you bind on earth, except for Apostolic succession, is held bound”. Sola scriptura has its dangers.

Anyway, JA4, according to BibleSteve (BS), you are irretrievably messed up, because you had no JW guidance in your bible reading. So there. Don’t believe us Catholics? We’ll sic the Witnesses on you to tune you up. Do we look better now?
Click to expand...
If you want to send the Witnesses after me then i will be forced to use my ultimate weapon against you catholics and that is Jack Chick tracts…:rolleyes: 😃
 
Might as well ask “If there really are pyramids in Egypt, why is it not mentioned in the scriptures?”. Moses and the Israelites were in Egypt. Jesus fled to Egypt. Why were there no mention of pyramids?

The pyramids must be a figment of people’s imagination!

If it’s not in the scriptures, it must not be true.
 
PinoyCatholic said:
Might as well ask “If there really are pyramids in Egypt, why is it not mentioned in the scriptures?”. Moses and the Israelites were in Egypt. Jesus fled to Egypt. Why were there no mention of pyramids?

The pyramids must be a figment of people’s imagination!

If it’s not in the scriptures, it must not be true.
Click to expand...
Why do you say that?
 
Because that’s the spirit of what you’re asking.

What you’re asserting is that if something is not seen by you personally in the Bible, it must not have been a part of the Faith. That is selfish and wrong.

Just as there are pyramids in Egypt but not recorded in the Bible, there are some things of the Faith that are not explicitly mentioned in there too. The Trinity is one good example. The word does not appear, but it is a core tenet of our Christian Faith. One can infer the Trinity from the scriptures just as much as one can infer Apostolic Succession. The big problem is that you’re being selective of what you want to accept because of your personal interpretation of scripture.

There are some things of the Faith that were carried from one person to another by word of mouth and memory. Things said and done by Jesus and the Apostles that were so ordinary and obvious to them that they thought it wasn’t worth writing down because they taught their followers to do them anyway. Just because they didn’t write them down doesn’t mean they didn’t say or do them.

And just because you personally don’t see it written doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. That is just worshiping your own interpretation of scripture and not understanding the spirit and message of it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top