Alofa Atu
Well-Known Member
You are so confused. I never said it did. I stated what the word meant according to scripture, and the origin of the translation.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Let's see some Scriptural authority for APOSTOLIC SUCCESSION
- Thread starter robycop3
- Start date
- Status
Not a bit confused. "Easter" in the KJV's Acts 12:4 is a GOOF, plain-n-simple. No many-worded, complicated-looking excuse can explain it away.
Worship/veneration of Mary even worse sin than the Papacy!
He's got a point, you are a MINI-POPE. Even when we ask for someone who has a better understanding of christianity than you.
You said JOHN OAKS.
What does JOHN OAKS SAY?
"In any case, the Roman Catholic Church traces its beginning back to the original church which was established at Pentecost in AD 30. Christians started the church in Rome almost certainly by AD 50. Paul visited the well-established church in AD 63. The Roman Catholic Church can trace its roots all the way back to the original Christian church in Rome.
This fact may be confusing to you, because you are probably aware that the Roman Catholic Church today is very far from holding to biblical Christianity, with its popes, vestments, sacraments, incense, celibate priests, nuns, church calendar and much more. The Roman Catholic Church is clearly a very corrputed version of Christianity. Nevertheless, it is a historical fact that the church in Rome can literally trace its roots in a more or less uninterrupted line to the time of the apostles. Of course, Catholics, like Orthodox Christians, are very proud of their historical roots. My suggestion is that you not argue with this claim because it is true. "
My suggestion is that you not argue with this claim because it is true.
My suggestion is that you not argue with this claim because it is true.
My suggestion is that you not argue with this claim because it is true.
because it is true. because it is true. true. true. true. true. true. true.
No dodging bubba, DOES DR OAKS have better understanding of christianity THAN the great POPE MAXIMUS ROBY!?
Cause this ain't even the worst stuff he says. It gets better when he explains how the church can forgive sins.
Alan Gross
Well-Known Member
Do some come up with an apostolic succession?
That's weird.
Jesus Gave Power to the Apostles and The 70, but there has been no reason for anyone to think they have that, since.
There were particular requirements and criteria that were met by The Apostles.
One was that they had seen Jesus, Personally.
And so, The Lord Appeared to Paul.
Certainly, this is a fib, just like you pointed out the counterfeit popery fib.
In The Baptist History forum, there are some Scriptures relating to The Lord's churches.
Remember, as a Baptist, if there ever were any replies there to any of those, The Bible gives me The Home Court Advantage.
That's weird.
Jesus Gave Power to the Apostles and The 70, but there has been no reason for anyone to think they have that, since.
There were particular requirements and criteria that were met by The Apostles.
One was that they had seen Jesus, Personally.
And so, The Lord Appeared to Paul.
Certainly, this is a fib, just like you pointed out the counterfeit popery fib.
In The Baptist History forum, there are some Scriptures relating to The Lord's churches.
Remember, as a Baptist, if there ever were any replies there to any of those, The Bible gives me The Home Court Advantage.
"Jesus Gave Power to the Apostles and The 70, but there has been no reason for anyone to think they have that, since."
So you think only the apostles and the 70(72) performed miracles and healing is this correct?
After them no one else did is this correct?
I want to make sure I got your claim on this as accurate as possible.
I quoted JOHN OAKS. throw him under the bus and name any living person who has a better understanding of Christianity than POPE ROBY.
The one guy you said ......Disagrees with you. what a joke.
We are at an impasse. You reject the scriptural proof we point out. It is quite non-sensical that the Apostles did not want what they believed to be carried forward by the Church and it's subsequent leaders.
Hey, I have a question for you. Do you consider your particular Christian sect to be "apostolic"?
If you don't like the KJV, fine, but it is not outdated.
You remind me of preterists who choke up & change the subect when asked for HISTORICAL PROOF their doctrine is correct.
And also, you remind me of KJVOs who don't wanna discuss the FACT their myth has no SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT.
So, you either have Scriptural support for apostolic succession or ya don't. So far, you DON'T !
But then, what else am I to expect from a gang that chooses one of their fellows, crowns him with a fish-head, & says, "This is our Holy Father"?
Beliefs are not the same as apostleship.
Well, actually, it IS. Its English style has been outta use a long time, & newer translations correct many of its goofs & booboos.
I love the fact you don't acknowledge the GUY you claim has better understanding of Christianity totally dumped your position.
You don't want to look at it or even mention it because it only confirms how wrong you are.
All hail POPE ROBY.
Gaze upon my spiteful and victorious smile.....
Yeah, it is a dynamic equivalency translation so things that you don't like and other errors are in all translations. It is not outdated.
Alan Gross
Well-Known Member
I can tell each of those children God loves them and actually be sincere about it. Answer my question.
"Jesus Gave Power to the Apostles and The 70, but there has been no reason for anyone to think they have that, since."
So you think only the apostles and the 70(72) performed miracles and healing is this correct?
After them no one else did is this correct?
Confirm it, so I can school you.
“And the things that you have heard from me among many witnesses, commit these to faithful men who will be able to teach others also.” 2 Timothy 2:2.
This is not a message to evangelize. It is Paul’s command for Timothy to train teachers (elders, overseers), passing down through the generations those things known by the previous generation of leaders. So how do these faithful men receive their authority? Paul tells us.
“Do not neglect the gift that is in you, which was given to you by prophecy with the laying on of the hands of the eldership.” 1 Timothy 4:14. Also, “I remind you to stir up the gift of God which is in you through the laying on of my hands.” 2 Timothy 1:6.
Paul also instructs Timothy to pass this authority on in the same manner, but with discretion. “I charge you before God and the Lord Jesus Christ and the elect angels that you observe these things without prejudice, doing nothing with partiality. Do not lay hands on anyone hastily, nor share in other people’s sins . . . .” 1 Timothy 5:21-22.
Now, to be sure, these men ordained by Timothy are not apostles. Therefore, the term “apostolic succession” is somewhat of a misnomer except that the line of succession originates with the apostles. However, it is undeniable (for anyone who is honest in their approach to scripture) that Paul was instructing Timothy regarding succession in the rank of the clergy.
This is not a message to evangelize. It is Paul’s command for Timothy to train teachers (elders, overseers), passing down through the generations those things known by the previous generation of leaders. So how do these faithful men receive their authority? Paul tells us.
“Do not neglect the gift that is in you, which was given to you by prophecy with the laying on of the hands of the eldership.” 1 Timothy 4:14. Also, “I remind you to stir up the gift of God which is in you through the laying on of my hands.” 2 Timothy 1:6.
Paul also instructs Timothy to pass this authority on in the same manner, but with discretion. “I charge you before God and the Lord Jesus Christ and the elect angels that you observe these things without prejudice, doing nothing with partiality. Do not lay hands on anyone hastily, nor share in other people’s sins . . . .” 1 Timothy 5:21-22.
Now, to be sure, these men ordained by Timothy are not apostles. Therefore, the term “apostolic succession” is somewhat of a misnomer except that the line of succession originates with the apostles. However, it is undeniable (for anyone who is honest in their approach to scripture) that Paul was instructing Timothy regarding succession in the rank of the clergy.
Yes, it IS. Do YOU talk or write in that English style? Not that I've seen here!
- Status