|
Post by DKTrav88 on Apr 24, 2018 0:16:23 GMT
www.gotquestions.org/apostolic-succession.htmlThe doctrine of apostolic succession is the belief that the 12 apostles passed on their authority to successors, who then passed the apostolic authority on to their successors, continuing throughout the centuries, even unto today. The Roman Catholic Church sees Peter as the leader of the apostles, with the greatest authority, and therefore his successors carry on the greatest authority. The Roman Catholic Church combines this belief with the concept that Peter later became the first bishop of Rome, and that the Roman bishops that followed Peter were accepted by the early church as the central authority among all of the churches. Apostolic succession, combined with Peter’s supremacy among the apostles, results in the Roman bishop being the supreme authority of the Catholic Church – the Pope. However, nowhere in Scripture did Jesus, the apostles, or any other New Testament writer set forth the idea of “apostolic succession.” Further, neither is Peter presented as “supreme” over the other apostles. The apostle Paul, in fact, rebukes Peter when Peter was leading others astray (Galatians 2:11-14). Yes, the apostle Peter had a prominent role. Yes, perhaps the apostle Peter was the leader of the apostles (although the book of Acts records the apostle Paul and Jesus’ brother James as also having prominent leadership roles). Whatever the case, Peter was not the “commander” or supreme authority over the other apostles. Even if apostolic succession could be demonstrated from Scripture, which it cannot, apostolic succession would not result in Peter’s successors being absolutely supreme over the other apostles’ successors. Catholics point to Matthias being chosen to replace Judas as the twelfth apostle in Acts chapter 1 as an example of apostolic succession. While Matthias did indeed “succeed” Judas as an apostle, this is in no sense an argument for continuing apostolic succession. Matthias being chosen to replace Judas is only an argument for the church replacing ungodly and unfaithful leaders (such as Judas) with godly and faithful leaders (such as Matthias). Nowhere in the New Testament are any of the twelve apostles recorded as passing on their apostolic authority to successors. Nowhere do any of the apostles predict that they will pass on their apostolic authority. No, Jesus ordained the apostles to build the foundation of the church (Ephesians 2:20). What is the foundation of the church that the apostles built? The New Testament – the record of the deeds and teachings of the apostles. The church does not need apostolic successors. The church needs the teachings of the apostles accurately recorded and preserved. And that is exactly what God has provided in His Word (Ephesians 1:13; Colossians 1:5; 2 Timothy 2:15; 4:2). In short, apostolic succession is not biblical. The concept of apostolic succession is never found in Scripture. What is found in Scripture is that the true church will teach what the Scriptures teach and will compare all doctrines and practices to Scripture in order to determine what is true and right. The Roman Catholic Church claims that a lack of ongoing apostolic authority results in doctrinal confusion and chaos. It is an unfortunate truth (that the apostles acknowledged) that false teachers would arise (2 Peter 2:1). Admittedly, the lack of “supreme authority” among non-Catholic churches results in many different interpretations of the Bible. However, these differences in interpretation are not the result of Scripture being unclear. Rather, they are the result of even non-Catholic Christians carrying on the Catholic tradition of interpreting Scripture in accordance with their own traditions. If Scripture is studied in its entirety and in its proper context, the truth can be easily determined. Doctrinal differences and denominational conflicts are a result of some Christians refusing to agree with what Scripture says – not a result of there being no “supreme authority” to interpret Scripture. Alignment with scriptural teaching, not apostolic succession, is the determining factor of the trueness of a church. What is mentioned in Scripture is the idea that the Word of God was to be the guide that the church was to follow (Acts 20:32). It is Scripture that was to be the infallible measuring stick for teaching and practice (2 Timothy 3:16-17). It is the Scriptures that teachings are to be compared with (Acts 17:10-12). Apostolic authority was passed on through the writings of the apostles, not through apostolic succession.
|
|
|
Post by Διαμονδ on Nov 10, 2019 18:03:29 GMT
Surprisingly how many in this topic information not on topic. Even my insignificant person was mentioned here. Well I have always stood on principles that I don't care what you're views among my friends and acquaintances a lot of people with views completely opposite to my opinions and it does not prevent me to be with people in relations. I'm just more than a year ago, I said on this forum religious themes and decided to talk, because then a better understanding of the diversity and its possibilities in the discus. Of course I began to speak from the position of Church doctrine, not human innovations. As for jealousy, it is normal to be jealous of the salvation of human souls.
|
|
|
Post by Διαμονδ on Nov 10, 2019 18:23:26 GMT
With regard to this particular topic, does the word of God speak of Apostolic succession?It is clear that skeptics of different stripes will be against it but just read the Bible - 19. And I will set a sign among them, and I will send those that escape of them unto the nations, to Tarshish, Pul, and Lud, that draw the bow, to Tubal, and Javan, to the isles afar off, that have not heard my fame, neither have seen my glory; and they shall declare my glory among the Gentiles. 20. And they shall bring all your brethren for an offering unto the LORD out of all nations upon horses, and in chariots, and in litters, and upon mules, and upon swift beasts, to my holy mountain Jerusalem, saith the LORD, as the children of Israel bring an offering in a clean vessel into the house of the LORD. (Isaiah 66:19-20)
It clearly prophecy about refers to the age of Apostolic Acts. The Levites in ancient Israel was a closed succession group. I think enough has been said abouth this.
|
|
|
Post by DKTrav88 on Nov 10, 2019 18:27:57 GMT
There are specific things that need to happen before Christ returns. Where is the inconsistency between God being powerful/omnipotent and people turning away from Him? Who exactly are you talking about when you say "They've got nothing"? As far as the evolutionary theory, I don't know where you are getting these examples you gave. Starting with one thing at a time, I would say a major inconsistency in the evolutionary theory is that for it is just a theory, it has not been proven and cannot be proven because we cannot observe the millions of years that it apparently takes for the process of transition from one species into another. Also, the evolutionary theory requires a miracle, that life come from non-life; abiogenesis, which cannot be replicated in a laboratory. The evolutionary theory is just another religion of sorts. There's new followers of Christianity every day as well. I don't know what your point is. Every year some specific things, right? It means - never. I meant that God could bring back His followers, to make His church more powerful, etc. Christians have got nothing. Every day their number is falling down. I didn't make those researches, but it was showed in Arktos about half a year ago. I think some present statistic can help here too. (I'll drop some links at the end of my comment.) Those examples? Dinosaurs, new species on Earth, new species in Cosmos... tons of them. Any theory is just a theory. Recently, NineX told me about it in "Faith Argument" post. He said that we've sticked to loop thinking. There's no way to get out of the circle of thinking. We start with the void in our thoughts, and keep them be void all the time. (Or how a void becomes something?) All of Christians. Almost every church are loosing its followers. Statistics here show this. Christianity in 50 years100 next years of Christianity
Future of ReligionsEvery year? No. Can you cite the scripture you're referring to? The Bible says there's supposed to be a falling away of Christianity before Christ's return. New species in Cosmos? You mean aliens or life on other planets? You've seen this? What about dinosaurs and new species on earth? What do they mean for the theory of evolution?
|
|
KGrim
Full Member
Coming back to Arktos...for a little while anyways...just to see how things are doing.
Posts: 442
Likes: 238
Country: USA
Region: South East
Location: East Texas
Ancestry: Scotch-Irish
Politics: Conservative
Religion: Eastern Orthodox
Hero: Jesus
Age: 33 soon to be 34
Philosophy: Hesychasm
|
Post by KGrim on Nov 10, 2019 20:42:45 GMT
I have a standard. Its the bible and tradition.
"Do not neglect the gift that is in you, which was given to you by prophecy with the laying on of the hands of eldership." (1 Tim 4:14)
Again Paul says, "Now I praise you, brethren, that you remember me in all things and keep the traditions just as I delivered them to you." (1 Cor 11:2)
Here, obviously, we have referenced the laying on of hands and the passing on of authority. Paul even warns Timothy about passing on this authority hastily by the laying of hands in 1 Tim 5:22
These mental gymnastics you do must be exhausting. We in the Orthodox Church do not throw scripture out the window and treat our priests as gurus. It is a standard, but its also just data and all data needs to be interpreted. Because it needs to be interpreted in light of the teaching of the apostles we have the tradition to help us.
The inference to be made is that if prophecy (which is scripture) is not up for private interpetation then neither is the rest of scripture.
In your opinion from your private interpretation of the bible, which you think is sufficient authority to slander my religion which you misunderstand and misrepresent.
What we teach at our church is that just because someone isn't Orthodox that doesn't mean that they are not saved. That's a judgment that is strictly up to God and we know nothing about. My church does claim that the fullness of the truth can only be found within her boarders. We are not a cult.
I'm sorry that happened to you. We will have to agree to disagree, but you have to understand that the Church is my family. You have no idea how much I owe to the Church, especially to my local parish. I was virtually homeless and they took me in. If my church was some cult I would have jetted long time ago. So yes, I do get a little fired up when someone slams my religion when they haven't even tasted the depths of its richness.
In my time being Orthodox have become a better person than I was when I was Protestant. Humility is not the easiest thing to learn, and I've made thousands of mistakes in my life which I bitterly regret. I know that I am where God wants me to be so I'm not going to be persuaded by your argumentation anymore than you are going to be persuaded by mine. We both have our minds made up on the matter, and I'm sick of wasting words.
|
|
|
Post by Διαμονδ on Nov 10, 2019 21:46:45 GMT
KGrim What we teach at our church is that just because someone isn't Orthodox that doesn't mean that they are not saved. That's a judgment that is strictly up to God and we know nothing about. My church does claim that the fullness of the truth can only be found within her boarders. We are not a cult.
You've noticed that quite accurately. Therefore, religious struggle is part of Protestant morality, not Orthodox.I have long hinted that Mr. Dktraw abouth this. If he claims maximum impartiality then let him answer 2 simple questions : 1 ) What Church he goes to/its name and where it is located. Because it is unknown to his opponents. 2) Does he believe that a correct understanding of the Bible will help people to be saved ?Have a nice day to all.
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on Nov 11, 2019 0:02:15 GMT
KGrim Just because someone shows good to a person whether they're homeless, poor, or for some other reason it doesn't mean that they are automatically good or that they are from God even. God warns us to be careful and to test people before believing them as being from God because evil people can do good. Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits, whether they are of God; because many false prophets have gone out into the world. 1 John 4: 1 And evil people can be good. If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children, how much more shall your Father which is in heaven give good things to them that ask him? Matthew:7:11 So someone doing a good deed every so often does not qualify them as good or being from God. And laying of hands is not done for passing of authority. The verse you quoted was laying of hands to set elders. The other reason laying of hands is done is when a person chooses to become baptised. (For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.) Acts:8:16 Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost. Acts:8:17 So every single Christian must have hands laid on them. This isn't a sign of authority but of being a Christian.
|
|
KGrim
Full Member
Coming back to Arktos...for a little while anyways...just to see how things are doing.
Posts: 442
Likes: 238
Country: USA
Region: South East
Location: East Texas
Ancestry: Scotch-Irish
Politics: Conservative
Religion: Eastern Orthodox
Hero: Jesus
Age: 33 soon to be 34
Philosophy: Hesychasm
|
Post by KGrim on Nov 11, 2019 1:10:56 GMT
ElizabethBy this shall all men know that ye are My disciples: if ye have love one for another. - John 13:35 There is love in my parish. The Master says that you can tell the tree by its fruit. Thats on top of all the logical arguements for my church.
|
|
miner
New Member
Posts: 9
Likes: 1
|
Post by miner on Nov 11, 2019 1:42:21 GMT
www.gotquestions.org/apostolic-succession.html“In short, apostolic succession is not biblical....” I totally agree. I know you are aiming this at the Catholics, who in my opinion are so much less heretical than the Protestants, but seriously I am so sick of people calling Paul an apostle. All of his letters need to be removed from scripture, imho
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on Nov 11, 2019 1:52:22 GMT
www.gotquestions.org/apostolic-succession.html“In short, apostolic succession is not biblical....” I totally agree. I know you are aiming this at the Catholics, who in my opinion are so much less heretical than the Protestants, but seriously I am so sick of people calling Paul an apostle. All of his letters need to be removed from scripture, imho What's wrong with Paul? Jesus Himself chose Paul to continue His work for Him.
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on Nov 11, 2019 1:56:49 GMT
ElizabethBy this shall all men know that ye are My disciples: if ye have love one for another. - John 13:35 There is love in my parish. The Master says that you can tell the tree by its fruit. Thats on top of all the logical arguements for my church. Love is something that His disciples have and love is something others can have too. Love doesn't mean you are automatically His disciples. For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same? Matthew:5:46 Non Christians can love too and NOT be His disciples.
|
|
miner
New Member
Posts: 9
Likes: 1
|
Post by miner on Nov 11, 2019 1:57:12 GMT
Did you notice that only Paul says that? None of the other apostles call him an apostle. In fact, he kinda pissed them off.
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on Nov 11, 2019 2:00:32 GMT
Did you notice that only Paul says that? None of the other apostles call him an apostle. In, he kinda pissed them off. No one ever got mad at Him for following Christ and being His disciples. Or can you quote these verses? But if Paul was set by Jesus to take over that completely gives Paul authority to do what God wanted because God said to listen to Paul.
|
|
miner
New Member
Posts: 9
Likes: 1
|
Post by miner on Nov 11, 2019 2:21:08 GMT
Did you notice that only Paul says that? None of the other apostles call him an apostle. In, he kinda pissed them off. No one ever got mad at Him for following Christ and being His disciples. Or can you quote these verses? But if Paul was set by Jesus to take over that completely gives Paul authority to do what God wanted because God said to listen to Paul. James 2:17 James directly contradicts Paul. Luke in Acts 9:26-31 Luke is rather lukewarm over Paul. Even in Acts Luke denied the title of Apostle to Paul and he himself refers to Paul as merely a witness.
|
|
miner
New Member
Posts: 9
Likes: 1
|
Post by miner on Nov 11, 2019 2:23:18 GMT
This is not a new idea. The God of Paul and the God of Jesus are two different Gods.
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on Nov 11, 2019 2:35:51 GMT
No one ever got mad at Him for following Christ and being His disciples. Or can you quote these verses? But if Paul was set by Jesus to take over that completely gives Paul authority to do what God wanted because God said to listen to Paul. James 2:17 James directly contradicts Paul. Luke in Acts 9:26-31 Luke is rather lukewarm over Paul. Even in Acts Luke denied the title of Apostle to Paul and he himself refers to Paul as merely a witness. Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone. James:2:17 What's the contradiction with this verse? And here's the verse you mean... And when Saul was come to Jerusalem, he assayed to join himself to the disciples: but they were all afraid of him, and believed not that he was a disciple. Acts:9:26 Do you know why they didn't believe he was a disciple at first? He bacame a disciple in the book of Acts so this is the early stages of him being a disciples and people were not aware of it yet. Plus Paul was killing Christians before he became an apostle so it would be kind of unbeliable. But Paul converted and became Christian and an apostle. At first some couldn't believe it and then they knew it was fact.
|
|