Apostolic Succession ?

by a Christian 72 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  StAnn

  Anybody~What do the ante-nicene fathers say about this? Seems like they'd have had to deal with this issue when they decided to accept or reject the successors to the original apostles.

  I still don't see anything that implicitly makes the point that Jesus has to do the appointing. Here is a qoute (Matt. 16:18) and some commentary on it from the Douay-Rheims bible. Note that Peter was given the authority to do things, such as appoint apostles, when he was given the keys of the kingdom. This commentary makes sense to me.

  "18 And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. Thou art Peter, etc... As St. Peter, by divine revelation, here made a solemn profession of his faith of the divinity of Christ; so in recompense of this faith and profession, our Lord here declares to him the dignity to which he is pleased to raise him: viz., that he to whom he had already given the name of Peter, signifying a rock, John 1:42, should be a rock indeed, of invincible strength, for the support of the building of the church; in which building he should be, next to Christ himself, the chief foundation stone, in quality of chief pastor, ruler, and governor; and should have accordingly all fulness of ecclesiastical power, signified by the keys of the kingdom of heaven. Upon this rock, etc... The words of Christ to Peter, spoken in the vulgar language of the Jews which our Lord made use of, were the same as if he had said in English, Thou art a Rock, and upon this rock I will build my church. So that, by the plain course of the words, Peter is here declared to be the rock, upon which the church was to be built: Christ himself being both the principal foundation and founder of the same. Where also note, that Christ, by building his house, that is, his church, upon a rock, has thereby secured it against all storms and floods, like the wise builder, Matthew 7:24-25. The gates of hell, etc... That is, the powers of darkness, and whatever Satan can do, either by himself, or his agents. For as the church is here likened to a house, or fortress, built on a rock; so the adverse powers are likened to a contrary house or fortress, the gates of which, that is, the whole strength, and all the efforts it can make, will never be able to prevail over the city or church of Christ. By this promise we are fully assured, that neither idolatry, heresy, nor any pernicious error whatsoever shall at any time prevail over the church of Christ.

  http://www.newadvent.org/bible/mat016.htm
• 

  Kenneson

  While it is true that the word "apostle" usually refers to the 12 or those like Paul, who had a special appearance of Christ, the New Testament also gives it a broader meaning. Christ Himself is referred to as an apostle in Heb. 3:1. It also can apply to an inferior disciple who was chosen and sent by the Apostles, to preach the Gospel or contribute to its spread. Barnabas is called an apostle, along with Paul in Acts 14:4, 14; Silvanus and Timothy, along with Paul in 1 Thess. 1:1 and 2:6

  While the office of the Twelve did not continue, it is obvious that apostolic power was preserved in other officers, otherwise the Church would have come to an end.
• 

  JosephMalik

  Kenneson,

  That's right. And the reason Jesus was called an Apostle is because the Father appointed Him for this mission. It always takes someone else who is directly and personally involved to make such an appointment. And position or rank does make a difference as to the authority that such an apostle has. 1:3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high; 4 Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they. The inheritance of angels like Abraham, Moses and David and the many prophets they admired was now surpassed by the Apostle Jesus. It is in this context that such verses given to the Christian and believing Jews that were still keeping the Law was to be understood.

  Joseph
• 

  Kenneson

  Since the word "apostle" means one sent on a mission, it stands to reason that Jesus was an apostle because He was sent by the Father. Jesus sent the 12, so they were Apostles. But the Father and the Son were not the only ones to send. Barnabas, Sylvanus and Timothy were sent by the 12 as messengers or missionaries. In 2 Cor. 8:23 the apostles (messengers or missionaries) are sent by particular churches. See also Phil. 2:25 It is also highly likely that the apostles mentioned in 1 Cor. 12:28 (the charismatic offices of the Church) and Eph. 3:5 and 2 Pet. 3:2 are not meant exclusively of the 12.
• 

  justhuman

  Below I'm attaching interesting links about Apostolic Succesion. In the Christian Orthodox Church you can find the Apostolic succesion fro 2000 years, starting from James the first Bishop of Jerusalim. This is one of the major issues I started to investicate when I left WT.

  There are many aspects that show to us that the Apostolic Church is still the same for over 2000 years. A brief look at history show the following facts

  1.The Apsotolic Chruch (East part -Constantinoupole and West Part- Rome) was united until 1080 A.D when the Catholics(Papal Church) seperated from the East Church(Orthodox). The main issue was actually political games by the Franks, and took as an excuse the Filioque Issue.

  2.While the Holy Catholic Apostolic Church-That is the name of the Orthodox Church, remain to the original teachings of the Apostoles and the succesors, the Roman Catholics have fallen to more theological mistakes,(Pope, Purgatory)and they stoped being in union with the Apostolic Church creating a schisma

  3.The language was another problem. The transtation from Greek to Latin created those theological problems, because some words cannot give the precise translation, and as a result they fallen to more mistakes

  4.Luther instead of going back to the Apostolic Church and search for the original teachings, he broke from the Roman Catholics and form Protestands. As a result the Protestand movement had fallen into more serious mistakes regarding the Theological interpretation of the Christian Faith. That is why we find so many thousands Protestand movemens, and one of them the Watchtower.

  5. While the Protestands accept only the Bible, as God's words, they ignore the fact that the Bible came out from the Apostolic Church, set by Saint Athanasios in the 4th century by accepting Revelation as the last Book of the Biblical Canon. and for the Christian Orthodox the Bible is one of God's revelation regarding the Gospel. We have many writtings from the Early Church Fathers, early Bishops like Ignatios the succesor of James in Jerusalim. The wealth of those writtings is incredible.

  http://www.oodegr.com/english/ekklisia/profites1.htm

  http://www.oodegr.com/english/ekklisia/apostasia2.htm

  http://www.oodegr.com/english/ag_grafi/kanonas0.htm
• 

  NanaR

  Great post, JustHuman!!

  Pax,

  Ruth
• 

  JosephMalik

  Justahuman,

  And we have the Koran, Book of Mormon, false doctrines of every description many of which came out of such writings, and no scriptural proof whatever for Apostolic succession. Jesus was an Apostle and yet Jesus was not one of the 12. There is no successor to Jesus. We even had serious apostasy within the Christian faith with James taking the lead in keeping the Law as a basis for salvation and their error in doing this was recorded in scripture. Such Christians Jews in Jerusalem nearly killed Paul. The Faith had a real fight on its hands from its early beginning trying to establish what was really truth. And it got worse after the death of such Apostles who were the only ones authorized to establish it's foundation and appoint others like Timothy or Luke to enforce it. All this shows us that there were so called Church fathers that were not part of the 12 or appointed by any Apostle that had personal views that did not become part of the inspired record. And for good reason. It is amazing to me that from all this we have what is now called scripture as the basis for our Faith. Someone greater than any of them had a hand in this. And this text like what they had in the first century is still poorly understood and mangled by so many professing to follow and believe its content. Perhaps this is why our Lord could say to John regarding a future time in history: Re 2:17 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the hidden manna, and will give him a white stone, and in the stone a new name written, which no man knoweth saving he that receiveth it.

  Joseph
• 

  NanaR

  Church fathers that were not part of the 12 or appointed by any Apostle that had personal views that did not become part of the inspired record.

  Who then decided, by the Holy Spirit, which books would become the inspired record, particularly who decided which writings would become the New Testament? When did this occur?

  If Apostolic Succession did not occur, how then was the faith passed on to future generations of Christians? If you say by means of Holy Scripture only, then how was it passed before the canon of Holy Scripture was set (see above)? How was it spread throughout the entire earth before the death of the Apostles (as recorded in Scripture) and before the New Testament was completed? How was it passed on through the millenium or so thereafter that passed before the invention of the printing press, and during a time when few people could read?

  If Apostolic Succession was not to happen, what was the use of Our Lord Jesus Christ imparting to St. Peter the power to bind and to loose, and imparting to the Apostles the power to forgive sins?

  If Apostolic Succession did not happen, what was the purpose of the "laying on of the hands"?

  Where was the Christian Church for the time between the death of the 12 original apostles and the beginning of whatever you believe to be the Christian Church now? In what group did the Holy Spirit abide for all that time, since Jesus sent the Holy Spirit to be the Helper of Christians?

  Pax,

  Ruth
• 

  a Christian

  Ruth,

  You asked: Who then decided, by the Holy Spirit, which books would become the inspired record, particularly who decided which writings would become the New Testament? When did this occur?

  Early Catholic Church Councils, which some would have us believe assembled the collection of books which now make up our Bibles, actually did no such thing. These Councils merely debated the canonicity of a few books, but they changed nothing. The books which they decided to acknowledge as canonical were already generally accepted, although questions had been raised about them. Those which they refused to admit into the canon had never been included in it. They did not expel from the canon any book which had previously been admitted. These Councils only confirmed public opinion. They did not form it.

  However, by medievel times most Catholic scholars considered the writings of the Old Testament Apocrypha to be a part of the Bibles. Yet many medieval Catholic scholars did not believe that these writings were inspired by God. The Council of Trent was convened in 1546 largely to deal with this matter. Only then was the Old Testament Apocrapha officially delared by the Catholic Church to be canonical. There is little doubt that they did this partly because the Apocrypha contains material which supports certain otherwise unscriptural Catholic doctrines, such as purgatory and praying for the dead.

  The canon of the New Testament was set from the First Century (under the direction of both the Holy Spirit and the Apostles themselves). It is Catholic myth that Catholics gave the world the Bible.

  In fact Catholic scholars use the terms "protocanonical" and "deuterocanonical" to signify respectively those books of Scripture that were received by the entire Church from the beginning as inspired, and those whose inspiration was accepted by the Catholic Church only much later.

  You asked: If Apostolic Succession was not to happen, what was the use of Our Lord Jesus Christ imparting to St. Peter the power to bind and to loose, and imparting to the Apostles the power to forgive sins?

  I don't follow your logic. Because Christ gave His Apostles these powers that means they must have then passed them on to others? If I appoint you to watch over my children and discipline them as needed in my absence does that mean I have also given you the authority to appoint whoever you wish to do so in your absence?

  You asked: If Apostolic Succession did not happen, what was the purpose of the "laying on of the hands"?

  The Apostles used the laying on of hands to confer spiritual gifts, blessings, and at times authority, but never all of the authority which Christ had given them.

  You asked: Where was the Christian Church for the time between the death of the 12 original apostles and the beginning of whatever you believe to be the Christian Church now? In what group did the Holy Spirit abide for all that time, since Jesus sent the Holy Spirit to be the Helper of Christians?

  The Christian church has never vanished from this earth. The Christian church, also known as "the Body of Christ", is made up of all true believers in Jesus Christ. Members of Christ's body have always been able to be found in all organized Christian fellowships and in none of them.
• 

  a Christian

  accidental duplication