Catholics - Do You Take Apostolic Succession by Faith?

Truth needs to be drummed in hard and repeatedly, until truth sets those people who are in bondage and servitude free from the slumber in falsehood.

Awake oh spiritual sword, let the bastions of falsehood be ripped from underneath those who practice them and let your light be lit on the house tops, so that your time is coming to reign and to take what is rightfully yours, in which you purchased by your precious blood.

Let the separation of the sheep from the goats begin in earnest and awake those who slumber in falsehood to awake to everlasting righteousness and be prepared as the many virgins who have trimmed their lamps, for your coming Lord is at the door, knowing @The Times we are living in.

Ron Gurley said:

The "church" mentioned in the Bible is NOT the RCC.

Click to expand...

As I read the OP, the question there was addressed to members of churches that have Apostolic Succession.

I presume that members of other churches do not agree with the principle. That's to be expected.

bishopric (noun)
the authority or the geographic area managed by a bishop

0 Bible search results for “bishop.”

1 Timothy 3:2
An overseer, then, must be above reproach,
the husband of one wife, temperate, prudent, respectable, hospitable, able to teach,

OP: ...Q: RCC "Apostolic Succession"...True or False?

A: False doctrine. Un-Biblical.

apostolic succession (NOUN)

1. (in Christian thought) the uninterrupted transmission of spiritual authority from the (11-12) apostles through successive popes and bishops, taught by the Roman Catholic Church but denied by most.

Is apostolic succession biblical?

The RCC boldly asserts that their bishops are the true successors to the original (11?) apostles of Jesus Christ. But there is not one single verse of Scripture given to support their conjured up claim. The apostles/disciples were eyewitnesses to the ministry of Jesus. They were with Christ from the beginning until He ascended to heaven. Theirs was a unique and unrepeatable ministry. So how is it possible that the apostles / ("bishops?" appointed others to be successors to what they themselves had experienced?

Does an unbroken history mean the Roman Catholic Church is true? | CARM.org

Why do Catholics cling so tightly to the tradition of "apostolic succession" when there's no biblical support for it? All you can point to are dubious opinions of a few early Christian writers.

Ron Gurley said:

bishopric (noun)
the authority or the geographic area managed by a bishop

0 Bible search results for “bishop.”

1 Timothy 3:2
An overseer, then, must be above reproach,
the husband of one wife, temperate, prudent, respectable, hospitable, able to teach,

Click to expand...

"bishop" is a synonym for "overseer". In the Greek Orthodox Church they are called "episcopos", which is exactly the same word used throughout the New Testament.

Ron Gurley said:

OP: ...Q: RCC "Apostolic Succession"...True or False?

A: False doctrine. Un-Biblical.

apostolic succession (NOUN)

1. (in Christian thought) the uninterrupted transmission of spiritual authority from the (11-12) apostles through successive popes and bishops, taught by the Roman Catholic Church but denied by most.

Click to expand...

This is false. The vast majority of Christians hold to some form of apostolic succession. That includes Catholics, Anglicans, Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox. Your view is the minority.

Ron Gurley said:

All you can point to are dubious opinions of a few early Christian writers

Click to expand...

Some of them were taught directly by the Apostle John. I would take their opinion over your dubious opinion any day.

The Times said:

Where is John in the Apostolic succession equation?

1The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John: (Revelation 1:1)

I don't know why people don't realise, that there exists a hierarchy here within the Church of Christ. Notice God the Father gives this Revelation to his Son Jesus Christ and then Jesus Christ by his signet ring as The King of kings authorises it for John's eyes only via his heavenly messenger.

Where is John in the Apostolic succession equation?

Would you not say that John is the go between man in passing this critical to the faith instructions and information, that is of great concern to the entire global Christian Church at that time?

Who is the go between authorised man in dispensing of the Revelation of Jesus Christ

4John to the seven churches which are in Asia: Grace be unto you, and peace, from him which is, and which was, and which is to come; and from the seven Spirits which are before his throne;

Question.....was there another spirit operating outside of the seven Spirits of God and claiming what they ought not to in the first place?

John is dispensing this critical to the faith instructions and information to the entire Christian Church. There is no Church that is left out, otherwise one would charge Jesus for not addressing his entire Church, which off course would be a false claim, by those very people who claim to be the Church and to have the keys of Apostolic succession, neglecting where John fits in their invented Apostolic succession.

9I John, who also am your brother, and companion in tribulation, and in the kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ, was in the isle that is called Patmos, for the word of God, and for the testimony of Jesus Christ.

John was in a place as the Patriarch of the entire Church, where he was given access to the Holy of Holies, for him to be before the presence of the Lord and be authorised by the Lord to receive the pertinent to the faith Revelation.

What more can one say to those who claim what is not theirs in the first place.....

I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet, 11Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and, What thou seest, write in a book, and send it unto the seven churches which are in Asia;

John was in the Spirit, brought before the presence of God, in the Holy of Holies. We know that only the High Priest in the Old Testament had access to the Holy of Holies. In this case Jesus is the High Priest residing in the Holy of Holies and had given access to John on that day, when he was in the Spirit, in order for him to receive the Revelation of Jesus Christ.

Our Kingly High Priest from the Holy of Holies instructed John to write to his entire Church. He didn't leave others out did he! People YOU dare not believe that he left out THE CHURCH, do you?

Who now was and is still claiming Apostolic succession.....hmmmmmm.....any takers?

Click to expand...

What does this rambling even mean. Also I'm curious. Have you ever actually been Orthodox or are you just full on Anti pre 1600 church? Cause I guess that 1000 years in the Middle there where everyone was Catholic or Orthodox means that there were no Christians.

Ron Gurley said:

The "church" mentioned in the Bible is NOT the RCC.

Matthew 18:17
If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.

to the church...Greek 1577...ekklēsia...
I.a gathering of citizens called out from their homes into some public place, an assembly
A.an assembly of the people convened at the public place of the council for the purpose of deliberating
B.the assembly of the Israelites
C.any gathering or throng of men assembled by chance, tumultuously
D.in a Christian sense
i.an assembly of Christians gathered for worship in a religious meeting
ii.a company of Christian, or of those who, hoping for eternal salvation through Jesus Christ, observe their own religious rites, hold their own religious meetings, and manage their own affairs, according to regulations prescribed for the body for order's sake
iii.those who anywhere, in a city, village, constitute such a company and are united into one body
iv.the whole body of Christians scattered throughout the earth
v.the assembly of faithful Christians already dead and received into heaven

The "CHURCH" of the Bible is the spiritual "Body of Christ:

1 Cor. 12 (NASB)
11 But one and the same Spirit works all these things, distributing to each one individually just as He wills.
12 For even as the body is one and yet has many members,
and all the members of the body, though they are many, are one body,
so also is Christ. 13 For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body,(spiritual Body of Christ)
whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free, and we were all made to drink of one Spirit.

Acts 16:5
So the churches (ekklēsia) were being strengthened in the faith, and were increasing in number daily.

Click to expand...

What do you think the RCC is other than a gathering of believers receiving communion. That was the primary function of those early meeting in peoples homes, to celebrate the proto liturgy. Lets not forget the Apostle James wrote the first liturgy.

Just because they didn't have the resources or legal means to make buildings like synagogues, doesn't mean they wouldn't have if they could have. After all they met in the synagogues first before they were banned.

To be united in faith is to have a church structure. It is a necessity.

@Ron Gurley
Christianity became a Roman state based religion and those who ran it did so not as friends of Jesus, but knowing fully well that if they stay within the program of God, then they would retain the power of hand and in this regard they thought to themselves that God would be obligated to leave them alone, whilst they controlled the masses. Historically this is what happened.

Hence scripture does say that......
He will speak against the Most High and oppress his holy people and try to change the set times and the laws. The holy people will be delivered into his hands for a time, times and half a time. (Daniel 7:25)

They know that when things got out of hand and they stepped away from the program, then they received the due judgement. So in this regard history repeated for these controllers who then played along with God, within his program and God left them alone for a while, until.........

Until.....2011 when the program no longer behaved as it always did previously and they found themselves at the end of the stick. So what they did was to say amongst themselves the war is on, then they opened the flood gates of hell, through homosexual unions, by the redefinition of a sanctified matrimony before God and redefined gender and redefined humanity itself. These controllers are now manifesting in numbers in the last days because God has called it a day and their time is short and they know it, hence the controllers human policies is to crash and burn.

The same controllers who used Christianity as their state based religion will make following Jesus illegal, by comparing it to terrorists and we see that the program has changed for the controllers and they seek to disband their long subjugated Christian religion by tearing it down piece by piece until there is nothing left of it.

Historically speaking Roman style unity brings about persecutions and annihilation of opposing views. Since 2011 the program no longer works for them and now they are playing their own program and the war between the controllers and God is on. It is only going to get fiercer as these controllers manifest as their real self before their congregations and then the fight is on. Brothers and sisters your fight is just beginning and your time of freedom is at the door.

But the court will sit, and his power will be taken away and completely destroyed forever. 27Then the sovereignty, power and greatness of all the kingdoms under heaven will be handed over to the holy people of the Most High. His kingdom will be an everlasting kingdom, and all rulers will worship and obey him.’ (Daniel 7:26-27)

There is a war going on and the sooner people realise that there is no basis for Apostolic succession, then the spiritual prisoners will finally be freed and what a time to coincide with God's Jubilee. The event is in motion and the controllers are in a panic and wanting to put all their checks and balances, so that they can get the inquisitions started. Brothers and sisters we are dealing with evil and the sooner those who sleep awake, then we have come to the point where.....

3Those who are wise will shine like the brightness of the heavens, and those who lead many to righteousness, like the stars for ever and ever. 4But you, Daniel, roll up and seal the words of the scroll until the time of the end. Many will go here and there to increase knowledge.” (Daniel 12:3-4)

Christianity brothers and sisters had been hijacked 1600 years ago and the pre 431 AD Church had been disbanded and the treason committed by those who sided with the evil emperor Theodosius 2.

The controllers do NOT want you to be free. Please listen and discern the times....



31“His armed forces will rise up to desecrate the temple fortress and will abolish the daily sacrifice. Then they will set up the abomination that causes desolation. 32With flattery he will corrupt those who have violated the covenant, but the people who know their God will firmly resist him.
33“Those who are wise will instruct many, though for a time they will fall by the sword or be burned or captured or plundered. 34When they fall, they will receive a little help, and many who are not sincere will join them. 35Some of the wise will stumble, so that they may be refined, purified and made spotless until the time of the end, for it will still come at the appointed time. (Daniel 11:31-35)

Are we going to be found worthy to die for the Lord, when the inquisitions come brothers and sisters.

In post #210 we notice that Francis refers to Paul vi and with a little investigation I realised the controllers using daily doubles in the mix of Apostolic succession........oh dear.....how ironic.....


Francis stated....."in the words of the great Pope Paul VI, "absurd dichotomies".

Absurd dichotomies in context is saying it's absurd to claim to love Christ without the Church.

It is a complete opposite of the teachings of Jesus Christ and the apostles and when I consider the claim of Apostolic succession, I look at the works of faith, which are not only absent, but in place of them are demoralising and destructive Ad Hominems, that are directed against those who yearn for a personal relationship with Jesus Christ.

In other words these controllers should mind their own business and not dictate who loves who and how love can be genuine. Talking about the controllers being judgemental of the countless Christians who have a personal relationship with Jesus, and can attest to it and not to mention those who yearn for that personal relationship.

The controllers are loosing brothers and sisters, because the program has changed and they have Corrupted with flatteries those who have foresaken the covenant and have their sights on those Christians who don't fall under the umbrella of their control and brainwashing.

Jesus said let the children come to me and prevent them not and many times he would instruct people to come to him and that his door is open to those who open their hearts to him and he is willing to answer those who knock on his door, for him to give them an answer. The saying that Jesus knocks on the door of our hearts and if we hear his voice and open, then he comes into us and sups with us, as he said you in me and I in you. Jesus is initiating the personal relationship from individual to individual.

The Apostles taught members to establish this personal relationship and yet the controllers are saying the opposite by pointing to an antithesis path, that is diametrically the opposite of what Jesus instructed people to do. Take for example the rich man and how Jesus asked him to follow him and give up all his worldly possessions.

Brothers and sisters please listen, if a Church institution becomes the only path to establishing a relationship with Jesus, then the institution becomes a possession of the world and Jesus says, like he did to the rich man, to leave your possessions and come to me.

The truth shall set you free!

The Times said:

United Orthodoxy pre 431AD is not an own religion, it existed several hundreds years before the reprobate emperor Theodosius 2 sowed the first seeds of apostasy by authoring the first schism.

Click to expand...

So lessee, for four centuries give or take, Christians held your Nestorian beliefs, succinctly described as "the doctrine that there were two separate persons, one human and one divine, in the incarnate Christ. It is named after Nestorius, patriarch of Constantinople (428–31)". But for some reason, apparently, in your thinking, some rascally Roman or the other decided it was a good idea, the Church as a whole decided to chuck it all and take up worshiping Diana of the Ephesians, in the guise of the Blessed Virgin (title bestowed by the archangel Gabriel) instead. So when Nestorianism was declared heretical at Ephesus and Chalcedon, not only did it fly directly in the face of everything the Church believed, but the Church as a whole said "OK, we're good with that" and blithely started worshiping Mary/Diana instead of our Lord Christ.

Right.

Why Diana, BTW? The typical "the Romanists Changed Everything" narrative is that Mary is a substitute for Isis, and that most of the New Religion that those ancient Christians didn't notice was being foisted off on them came, somehow or the other, from Babylon. Is your lot in schism with the other Real Orthodox®?

Off course those patrons to Orthodoxy who did not bend their knees to Theodosius 2 would still hold claim of Orthodoxy, whilst those who suplicated to him sold out their fathers before them by changing Christokos to Theotokos and from that point onwards it was all down hill and the fruits that manifested the last 1600 years is a reflection of what entity the post 431 AD Church had become.

Click to expand...

So the Orthodox are not really orthodox, but your heterodox group is really orthodox because you follow the Old Way, which unfortunately requires imaging a backstory, inventing a bunch of history, and generally doing a lot of violence to the truth.

BTW, here are some quotes to ponder:

Irenaeus "The Virgin Mary, being obedient to his word, received from an angel the glad tidings that she would bear God" (Against Heresies, 5:19:1 [A.D. 189]).

Hippolytus "[T]o all generations they [the prophets] have pictured forth the grandest subjects for contemplation and for action. Thus, too, they preached of the advent of God in the flesh to the world, his advent by the spotless and God-bearing (theotokos) Mary in the way of birth and growth, and the manner of his life and conversation with men, and his manifestation by baptism, and the new birth that was to be to all men, and the regeneration by the laver [of baptism]" (Discourse on the End of the World 1 [A.D. 217]).

Gregory the Wonderworker "For Luke, in the inspired Gospel narratives, delivers a testimony not to Joseph only, but also to Mary, the Mother of God, and gives this account with reference to the very family and house of David" (Four Homilies 1 [A.D. 262]).

"It is our duty to present to God, like sacrifices, all the festivals and hymnal celebrations; and first of all, [the feast of] the Annunciation to the holy Mother of God, to wit, the salutation made to her by the angel, ‘Hail, full of grace!’" (ibid., 2).

There are others, but those suffice to put paid to your contention that the idea that speaking of the Blessed Virgin as the Mother of God was a novelty invented in the 5th Century. The rest of yuur contentions are equally spurious,

understand that Orthodoxy must revert to what they were pre 431 AD schism

Click to expand...

In short, to embrace the made-up heretical religion that you believe was followed before Ephesus. That religion being contrived without even a nodding acquaintance with Church History or the teaching of the ante-Nicene fathers. I reckon I'll pass. There is no end of people "rediscovering" an ancient church that never in fact existed, or flying to embrace ancient heresies that the Church cast onto the dung heap many, many centuries before. I've seen 'em come and go. Literally nothing new here.

Hail storm of fire coming down from heaven!

Click to expand...

Right.

The Times said:

The Orthodox Church pre 431AD had no icons in the Church and no icons were venerated.

Click to expand...

So? They didn't subscribe your Nestorian beliefs, either, but you don't seem impressed by that fact.

Can a Indian convert to Christianity get an Indian cow and use it as an icon in the Church by giving it a Christian spin?

Click to expand...

Fairly asinine attempt at an analogy. Just sayin'

Rome did just that, with their Diana queen of heaven

Click to expand...

Fake history, dude. Back it or retract it.

and allowed other countries who they conquered to proliferate their own icons to the pantheon of pagan symbols collections.

Click to expand...

Hilariously fake!

Is it fine for Jesus Christ though?

Click to expand...

Dunno, how is He with making up nonsense "history" and peddling it as fact?

A natural mother who bore his flesh, yet she had nothing to do with the miraculous conception

Click to expand...

Really?
Luk 1:e30-31
30 And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favour with God.
31 And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name Jesus.

So, care to retract that last false claim?

Quick syllogism for you:

Jesus Christ is God. This is testified to by the writings of ECFs like Justin Martyr and Ignatius of Antioch

The Blessed Virgin is Jesus' mother. Luke chapter 1 makes that abundantly clear.

Ergo, the Blessed Virgin is the Mother of God Dictated by logic.

Like it or lump it, that is how it is. No Dianas or Isises or pagan hootyhoo there, just the work of God.

Jesus was not made by human hands

Click to expand...

Apart from the hilarious mental image, you still persist in trying to say that the Blessed Virgin had no part in our Lord's birth. Scripture belies that ridicuous idea again and again.

through natural means between a father and a mother and so, even the title mother of the flesh, for Mary in the miraculous conception could not naturalistically be merited.

Click to expand...

in English?

The Orthodox Church pre 431 AD claimed Mary to be the mother of the flesh.

Click to expand...

Nah, just Nestorius and his followers. The Church rejected his attempt to divide the indivisible natures of our Lord. He *is* God. He *is* human. To try and pry the two apart is nonsense, but people are perpetually trying. It was bogus then, it's bogus now.

If one uses a naturalistic methodology to arrive at a conclusion that because Mary is the naturalistic mother of Jesus through a natural process, and Jesus happens to be fully Man and fully God, then naturally Mary must also be the mother of God.

Click to expand...

Then there is an end of the matter.

The answer to this is it was not a naturalistic conception by a father and a mother

Click to expand...

Father, God. Mother, Mary. Next sophistry?

To do so would be blasphemy!

Click to expand...

To deny it is merely ludicrous.

Ron Gurley said:

Apostolic Succession - The Roman Catholic teaching that there is a direct line of descendants with its requisite authority that proceed from the original apostles down the line of bishops in the Roman Catholic Church.

Click to expand...

As we've gone over a time or three, NOT simply the RCC. And the fact that it exists is indisputable. So what is your point?

Ron Gurley said:

Methinks the RCC has twisted the meaning and importance of "apostles" (messengers).

Click to expand...

You prefer the modern style of giving the title "apostle" to anyone you please? I prefer the original, more precise meaning. The engineer showing through I guess.

The original commissioned 11/12 by Jesus were all dead < 100 AD.

Click to expand...

And they, in your opinion, ordained no bishops? Really?

"Canon" closed ~394 AD. Amen.

Click to expand...

Have you thanked a Catholic for the Canon yet? <Laugh>

Ron Gurley said:

I allow God the Holy Spirit to interpret Scripture for me, not fallible men.

Click to expand...

Wait, I do the same, but you and I come to dramatically different conclusions! Why is that?

The Times said:

31“His armed forces will rise up to desecrate the temple fortress and will abolish the daily sacrifice. Then they will set up the abomination that causes desolation.

Click to expand...

Good job the Temple was never desecrated, and that the daily sacrifice continues unhindered, right? And those Roman sacrifices in the Holy of Holies weren't abominable, oh no no no! <Laugh>

Albion said:

As I read the OP, the question there was addressed to members of churches that have Apostolic Succession.

I presume that members of other churches do not agree with the principle. That's to be expected.

Click to expand...

I'm Anglican. We believe in the Apostolic Succession.

Ron Gurley said:

bishopric (noun)
the authority or the geographic area managed by a bishop
0 Bible search results for “bishop.”,

Click to expand...

Try the KJV

Ron Gurley said:

I allow God the Holy Spirit to interpret Scripture for me, not fallible men

Click to expand...

The early bishops had both the Apostles and the Holy Spirit. Why doesn't your interpretation line up with theirs?