Is Scripture MISSING Dogmas?

[MoreCoffee]

It isn't dogma to count the number of successors.

 

[ThatTrueLight]

It isn't dogma to count the number of successors.

I think that it is when the holy scriptures tell us plainly that there are twelve and even depicts the New Jerusalem as having TWELVE foundations.

You are claiming that every pope is an Apostle, are you not?

 

[ThatTrueLight]

How many Popes accompanied the twelve from the time of John and were witnesses to His resurrection?

 

[ThatTrueLight]

You might want to EDIT the revelation of Jesus Christ and write in that there are over two hundred foundations to the New Jerusalem.

 

[MoreCoffee]

...
You are claiming that every pope is an Apostle, are you not?

No.

 

[ThatTrueLight]

No.

Oh, I thought that is what Apostolic Succession meant.

Nice to know that you believe there are only TWELVE as scripture plainly declares.

 

[MoreCoffee]

I am confident that apostolic succession is defined in many good dictionaries.

 

[ThatTrueLight]

I am confident that apostolic succession is defined in many good dictionaries.

What could be better than the horses mouth though?

So to clarify, you do not believe that any Pope was ever an Apostle.

Is that correct?

 

[MoreCoffee]

No.

 

[ThatTrueLight]

No.

Brother, feel free to correct me here.

So you do believe that SOME popes are Apostles, specifically beyond the TWELVE listeed in the holy scriptures?

 

[MoreCoffee]

Brother, feel free to correct me here.

So you do believe that SOME popes are Apostles, specifically beyond the TWELVE listeed in the holy scriptures?

No.

 

[ThatTrueLight]

No.

Wonderful. So the RCC believes that there are only twelve Apostles of the Lamb and that there are no more than that.

I would agree Brother!

 

[MoreCoffee]

Too many misconceptions in your earlier posts. It takes many posts to get to the heart of the matter.

 

[BobRyan]

But what's interesting is that, while the early believers were still intimately familiar with the Ten Commandments, there's virtually no argument or controversy from history over the matter, from any of the churches/areas (even the use of "The Lord's Day" for the first day of the week isn't seriously contested by many). This was simply a practice, which nonetheless may've experienced a degree of evolution in one way or another. In any case it wasn't as if the Big Bad All-Powerful Roman Catholic Church (BBAPRCC) suddenly decided to decree that Sunday shall now be the day. It's similar to the case of infant baptism where the practice is simply considered to be universal, east and west, from as far back as the Church can remember, from the days of a nascent fledgling persecuted church.

Your own Catholic digest says infant baptism "Evolved over the years" - not at all practiced in the first century. So also your own Catholic Historian Thomas Bonkenkotter affirms that same point in his book 'A Concise History of the Catholic Church"

Your own Catholic Encyclopedia admits that the present Sunday tradition also evolved over time.

And since I don't think there even was a Catholic church in the first century as a denomination just as there was not the "Church of God" or the "World Wide Church of God" or the "Church of Christ" or the "Disciples of Christ" or the "Church of the Bretheren"... etc all those groups evolved out of what started out as the Christian Church in the first century.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Albion]

And since I don't think there even was a Catholic church in the first century as a denomination just as there was not the "Church of God" or the "World Wide Church of God" or the "Church of Christ" or the "Disciples of Christ" or the "Church of the Bretheren"... etc all those groups evolved out of what started out as the Christian Church in the first century.

Excuse me, but "So what?" Yes, almost all of today's denominations are descended, directly or indirectly, from the so-called "undivided Church" of the first millennium.

This is common knowledge; and every one of those "tree" flow charts that people like to use which trace the splits and evolution of the churches through the years very clearly recognizes this history.

 

[Souldier]

You are claiming that every pope is an Apostle, are you not?

No.

How can the Pope attain apostolic succession if hes not an Apostle?

 

[ThatTrueLight]

How can the Pope attain apostolic succession if hes not an Apostle?

Good question, that's what I would like to know.

 

[BobRyan]

But what's interesting is that, while the early believers were still intimately familiar with the Ten Commandments, there's virtually no argument or controversy from history over the matter, from any of the churches/areas (even the use of "The Lord's Day" for the first day of the week isn't seriously contested by many). This was simply a practice, which nonetheless may've experienced a degree of evolution in one way or another. In any case it wasn't as if the Big Bad All-Powerful Roman Catholic Church (BBAPRCC) suddenly decided to decree that Sunday shall now be the day. It's similar to the case of infant baptism where the practice is simply considered to be universal, east and west, from as far back as the Church can remember, from the days of a nascent fledgling persecuted church.

Your own "Catholic Digest" says infant baptism "Evolved over the years" - not at all practiced in the first century. So also your own Catholic Historian Thomas Bonkenkotter affirms that same point in his book 'A Concise History of the Catholic Church"

Your own Catholic Encyclopedia admits that the present Sunday tradition also evolved over time.

And since I don't think there even was a Catholic church in the first century as a denomination just as there was not the "Church of God" or the "World Wide Church of God" or the "Church of Christ" or the "Disciples of Christ" or the "Church of the Bretheren"... etc all those groups evolved out of what started out as the Christian Church in the first century.

Excuse me, but "So what?" Yes, almost all of today's denominations are descended, directly or indirectly, from the so-called "undivided Church" of the first millennium.

This is common knowledge; and every one of those "tree" flow charts that people like to use which trace the splits and evolution of the churches through the years very clearly recognizes this history.

I was just pointing out that the tradition in question evolved over time and placing one of the gamer-names on this or that idea still does not change the actual substance of the discussion, so then comparison to scripture still has to be done... etc.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

How can the Pope attain apostolic succession if hes not an Apostle?

And how does one "succeed" a succession of so-called top-10-wicked Popes?

And how does one "succeed" when all 3 papal lines were wiped out by Emperor Sigismund and then a new one created?

And is this thread supposed to be about the RCC adding doctrine of its own? or ??

 

[Albion]

How can the Pope attain apostolic succession if hes not an Apostle?

Think of the term as meaning "Succession from (one of) the Apostles."

And is this thread supposed to be about the RCC adding doctrine of its own? or ??

Right. Talk of Apostolic Succession does seem to be off-topic.