Clement does tell them about authority but its not his and from my earlier quotes the Christians viewed it as “advice”
Holding you to the same standard which you are holding: Sinse you assert that christians viewed it as advise I will ask you to prove this with your first century documents stating so. I am amazed that you claim to know what the first century christians were thinking.
1 Clement Chap 3:
These things, beloved, we write to you not only for your instruction, but also for our own remembrance.
Ignatius to Rome Chap 3
You [the church at Rome] have envied no one, but others you have taught. I desire only that what you have enjoined in your instructions may remain in force.
An interesting bit; They had 5 bishops within 100 to 200 miles of them, one of them being Timothy (about 150 miles away in Ephesus) whom they know personally, yet they write to Rome almost 1000 miles away. As well, John is still alive, either in Rome or Ephesus (96-98, Tertullian) Can you explain this?
Am we also to infer that by this that you believe the letters of Peter, John, James, Paul and Jude were viewed as advise? If you believe that the apostles did not pass on that authority by filling vacant offices:
**20: For it is written in the book of Psalms,
Let his habitation become desolate, and let there be no one to live in it'; and
His office let another take.’
21: So one of the men who have accompanied us during all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us,
22: beginning from the baptism of John until the day when he was taken up from us – one of these men must become with us a witness to his resurrection."
23: And they put forward two, Joseph called Barsab’bas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthi’as.
24: And they prayed and said, “Lord, who knowest the hearts of all men, show which one of these two thou hast chosen
25: to take the place in this ministry and apostleship from which Judas turned aside, to go to his own place.”
26: And they cast lots for them, and the lot fell on Matthi’as; and he was enrolled with the eleven apostles. **
prove it scripturally. The burden of proof in on you to show that the apostolic offices ceased to exist.
Are you contending we do not have a lot of history at this time.
You bet. And I’ll make you prove it. Show any, even one, first century Gospel or Epistle. Not extant copies, originals. Next prove that any extant copies came from originals and that they were not 2nd century and later inventions. I am giong to hold you to the exact same standard you have been holding. Prove christianity.
The church started, I would venture, on the day of Pentecost.
The church, in some parts, begin to hold Roman primacy, around 200. Do not confuse the argument.
I would venture that the Church started when Christ initiated it in Matthew. However I gather by your declination that you are not going to challenge myfavoritematins assertion.
WHAT?
I have never said such. This is a distraction, with a rather brash statement. I will not adress the biblical text too much, YET. Suffice to say, Orthodox and Protestans both believe in ordination and laying on of hands(with a different twist to be sure) but do not hold to the Primacy of the Bishop of Rome(with once again a different twist to be sure)
Don’t act so surprised, if I remember correctly, I said the same in my PM. I wouldn’t go lumping EO with protestantism in ordination. They, the EO, have a valid line of ordination even recognized by the church (form and matter)
Now I will challenge you as an elder to show your decention from any of the below through laying on of hands (actual power and authority, not theologic wishful thinking) Peter, John, Thomas, Andrew, James the Less, James the greater, Philip, Simon, Bartholomew, Matthew, Thaddaeus, Matthias, Paul, Timothy, Clement, Epaphras, Apollos, Damas, Polybius, Onesimus, Luke, Mark, Barnabas, etc.
As you question the primacy, so I also question by divine right from scripture, (“test the spirits”), your authority, by producing proof via apostolic laying on of hands throughout the centuries, and ask you to stand as a “light to the world” and provide it. Either there is historical proof of your claim, as you require, or this is smoke and mirrors.
40: For he that is not against us is for us.
Are you against the apostolic church or for it? (Not the invisible mythical one claimed) Is your goal to save people from becoming catholic or to attempt to undermine the church at it’s foundation or both? Many have tried before to knock down the rock upon which Christ built His church. (They ended up with massive heaches or turned to sand)
**Luke 10:16: “He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you rejects me, and he who rejects me rejects him who sent me.” **
Peace and God Bless
Nicene