ECT Apostolic Succession

[Idolater]

Bishops are not apostles.

Straw man, nobody said they were.

Paul was not one of the twelve apostles that will sit on twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel. Paul was that other different apostle.

Your understanding of scripture is fogged by your adherence to the false RCC doctrines.

Paul made Timothy and Titus bishops, told them to make new bishops, and to teach the new bishops to make new bishops themselves. He started Apostolic succession. Traditions who have continued to celebrate this sacrament of Holy Orders are the ones obedient to Paul, "that other different apostle".

 

[Right Divider]

Straw man, nobody said they were.

Irony meter ... off the charts!

Below you AGAIN attempt to conflate BISHOPS with APOSTLES.

Paul made Timothy and Titus bishops, told them to make new bishops, and to teach the new bishops to make new bishops themselves. He started Apostolic succession. Traditions who have continued to celebrate this sacrament of Holy Orders are the ones obedient to Paul, "that other different apostle".

The TWELVE apostles that will sit on TWELVE thrones judging the TWELVE tribes of ISRAEL have a mission and it's NOT the same mission as the ONE apostles for the ONE body.

Get out of the RCC and you might have a chance to learn the truth.

 

[Idolater]

Irony meter ... off the charts!

Below you AGAIN attempt to conflate BISHOPS with APOSTLES.

The TWELVE apostles that will sit on TWELVE thrones judging the TWELVE tribes of ISRAEL have a mission and it's NOT the same mission as the ONE apostles for the ONE body.

Get out of the RCC and you might have a chance to learn the truth.

And I repeat the third sentence in the OP. " Apostolic succession is the line of bishops stretching back to the apostles." There's no 'conflation' here, just confusion ---- yours.

 

[Right Divider]

And I repeat the third sentence in the OP. " Apostolic succession is the line of bishops stretching back to the apostles." There's no 'conflation' here, just confusion ---- yours.

Yes, there is confusion and it's all yours
Bishops are not apostles no matter what you say.

 

[Idolater]

Yes, there is confusion and it's all yours
Bishops are not apostles no matter what you say.

Plain.

 

[Right Divider]

Plain.

I can see that you have no idea why Christ chose TWELVE apostles for the TWELVE tribes of Israel.
Nor why Christ chose ONE apostle for the ONE body of Christ.

Get out of the RCC and get into the Bible.

 

[Idolater]

I can see that you have no idea why Christ chose TWELVE apostles for the TWELVE tribes of Israel.
Nor why Christ chose ONE apostle for the ONE body of Christ.

I'll just repeat again the third sentence in the OP. " Apostolic succession is the line of bishops stretching back to the apostles." Your Dispensationalist narrative is clouding your judgment.

Get out of the RCC and get into the Bible.

Where do you think the idea of bishops comes from? The Bible. Especially, Paul the Apostle's writings, just not only his.

 

[Right Divider]

I'll just repeat again the third sentence in the OP. " Apostolic succession is the line of bishops stretching back to the apostles."

I'll just keep repeating that BISHOPS are NOT APOSTLES.
You need to provide some BIBLICAL support for the very idea of this sort of "succession".

Your Dispensationalist narrative is clouding your judgment.

You are your usual... wrong.

Where do you think the idea of bishops comes from? The Bible. Especially, Paul the Apostle's writings, just not only his.

Again, your lack of basic understanding about God's plans leads you (and most of the Christian world) to attempt to combine things what are DIFFERENT.

The TWELVE apostles will sit on TWELVE thrones judging the TWELVE tribes of ISRAEL.
That is NOT the same as the body of Christ and the apostle Paul.

Luke 22:28-30 (AKJV/PCE)
(22:28) Ye are they which have continued with me in my temptations. (22:29) And I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me; (22:30) That ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

This is the FUTURE of the NATION of ISRAEL. Those TWELVE apostle are NOT "succeeded". They will be there in the FUTURE. This is also why THEIR names are on the TWELVE foundations in the NEW Jerusalem.

Rev 21:12-14 (AKJV/PCE)
(21:12) And had a wall great and high, [and] had twelve gates, and at the gates twelve angels, and names written thereon, which are [the names] of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel: (21:13) On the east three gates; on the north three gates; on the south three gates; and on the west three gates. (21:14) And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.

Your anti-Dispensationalist narrative is clouding your judgment.

 

[Idolater]

BISHOPS are NOT APOSTLES.

Literally nobody claimed otherwise.

 

[Leatherneck]

Literally nobody claimed otherwise.

Literally nobody claimed otherwise.

In post #87 you said,”Apostolic succession is the line of bishops stretching back to the apostles." How do you know who stretched back to the apostles since there were two popes at once ? Western Schism, also called Great Schismor Great Western Schism, in the history of the Roman Catholic Church, the period from 1378 to 1417, when there were two, and later three, rival popes, each with his own following, his own Sacred College of Cardinals, and his own administrative offices. https://www.britannica.com/event/Western-Schism

 

[Right Divider]

Literally nobody claimed otherwise.

You are literally unable think logically.

 

[Idolater]

In post #87 you said,”Apostolic succession is the line of bishops stretching back to the apostles." How do you know who stretched back to the apostles since there were two popes at once ?

Apples and oranges. The popes do not ascend to Peter's seat during the celebration of the sacrament of Holy Orders. There's Holy Orders on the one side (where bishops are validly consecrated by existing bishops), and then there's who the pope is on the other. And apart from the pope being a bishop, 'never the twain shall meet.'

Western Schism, also called Great Schismor Great Western Schism, in the history of the Roman Catholic Church, the period from 1378 to 1417, when there were two, and later three, rival popes, each with his own following, his own Sacred College of Cardinals, and his own administrative offices. https://www.britannica.com/event/Western-Schism

So what.

 

[Omniskeptical]

Apostolic Succession is the training of bishop's sucessor. One after another. It has nothing to with Peter according to the Eastern Orthodox.

 

[Leatherneck]

Apples and oranges. The popes do not ascend to Peter's seat during the celebration of the sacrament of Holy Orders. There's Holy Orders on the one side (where bishops are validly consecrated by existing bishops), and then there's who the pope is on the other. And apart from the pope being a bishop, 'never the twain shall meet.'

So what.

So if there were 3 popes at the same time with their own following ,their own sacred college of cardinals etc.you can’t figure out that the whole thing is phony ?

 

[Idolater]

Apostolic Succession is the training of bishop's sucessor. One after another. It has nothing to with Peter according to the Eastern Orthodox.

Only that Peter was one of the Twelve who consecrated bishops during his lifetime, just like Paul did, through the imposition of his hands, which is part of the celebration of the sacrament of Holy Orders.

And you're right that Orthodox bishops are also valid bishops along with Catholic bishops, both the Catholic Church and the Orthodox churches validly celebrate the sacraments (I think they call them 'mysteries').

 

[Omniskeptical]

Only that Peter was one of the Twelve who consecrated bishops during his lifetime, just like Paul did, through the imposition of his hands, which is part of the celebration of the sacrament of Holy Orders.

And you're right that Orthodox bishops are also valid bishops along with Catholic bishops, both the Catholic Church and the Orthodox churches validly celebrate the sacraments (I think they call them 'mysteries').

And what of the false Roman Catholic bishops who don't have families?

 

[Right Divider]

Only that Peter was one of the Twelve who consecrated bishops during his lifetime, just like Paul did, through the imposition of his hands, which is part of the celebration of the sacrament of Holy Orders.

And you're right that Orthodox bishops are also valid bishops along with Catholic bishops, both the Catholic Church and the Orthodox churches validly celebrate the sacraments (I think they call them 'mysteries').

And they both claim that they are the "real church" and that the other guy is not. They are both right on the second one.

 

[Omniskeptical]

Literally nobody claimed otherwise.

Nor is it claimed not to be samewise.

 

[Catholic Crusader]

Apostolic Succession is the training of bishop's sucessor. One after another. It has nothing to with Peter according to the Eastern Orthodox.

Only that Peter was one of the Twelve who consecrated bishops during his lifetime, just like Paul did, through the imposition of his hands, which is part of the celebration of the sacrament of Holy Orders.

And you're right that Orthodox bishops are also valid bishops along with Catholic bishops, both the Catholic Church and the Orthodox churches validly celebrate the sacraments (I think they call them 'mysteries').

"Apostolic Succession" is a colloquial phrase that describes the sacrament of Holy Orders. Through the laying on of hands, the gift that Jesus gave to the apostles, including authority, is handed down from bishop to bishop.

Early Church historian J. N. D. Kelly, a Protestant, writes, “[W]here in practice was [the] apostolic testimony or tradition to be found? . . . The most obvious answer was that the apostles had committed it orally to the Church, where it had been handed down from generation to generation. . . . Unlike the alleged secret tradition of the Gnostics, it was entirely public and open, having been entrusted by the apostles to their successors, and by these in turn to those who followed them, and was visible in the Church for all who cared to look for it” (Early Christian Doctrines, 37).

For the early Fathers, “the identity of the oral tradition with the original revelation is guaranteed by the unbroken succession of bishops in the great sees going back lineally to the apostles. . . . [A]n additional safeguard is supplied by the Holy Spirit, for the message committed was to the Church, and the Church is the home of the Spirit. Indeed, the Church’s bishops are . . . Spirit-endowed men who have been vouchsafed ‘an infallible charism of truth’” (ibid.).

 

[Right Divider]

"Apostolic Succession" is a colloquial phrase that describes the sacrament of Holy Orders. Through the laying on of hands, the gift that Jesus gave to the apostles, including authority, is handed down from bishop to bishop.

You cannot find "Apostolic Succession" in the Bible. There was one apostolic replacement, but no more.

Jesus told the twelve apostles that THEY would sit on twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

The "oral tradition" of the Roman Catholic "church" is a sham through and through.