Doubting Thomas,
Because the Lord Himself chose Paul as Juda's replacement. The Lord hasn't changed. He chose those in the OT who would speak on his behalf. He chose the disciples and he chose Paul. He chose before his manifesting in flesh. He chose while in flesh and continues to choose after his resurrection. Jesus told the disciples to wait for the promise of the Father while in Jerusalem. He didn't tell them they would decide who was going to replace Judas.
apostolic succession
Discussion in 'Free-For-All Archives' started by stubbornboy, May 13, 2004.
Page 2 of 3
-
There is only ONE Who can appoint Apostles:
The Lord Jesus Christ.
HEB 3:1 Therefore, holy brothers, who share in the heavenly calling, fix your thoughts on Jesus, the apostle and high priest whom we confess.
What do we see in Acts 1?
Jesus gave instructions for the group to return to Jerusalem and WAIT "for the gift my Father promised". They were to wait for the Holy Spirit.
Peter didn't wait. He was known as the implusive one. Peter decided that he could set in motion the appointing of an apostle. So he stood up in the midst, gave his reasons and criteria that he thought was reasonable, pulled in some O.T. scripture that seemed to support him.
Then they prayed and asked for the Lord to show them who was the replacement apostle.
Then they did an interesting thing. They didn't wait to hear from God. They reverted to what they thought they knew. They cast lots. They reverted to an Old Testament model. And they got a result. An apostle was chosen. And today, people go to this scripture to show how an apostle was chosen. They ignore that only Jesus can appoint apostles, then, and now.
Later, Jesus chose an apostle who would obey, and change the world. His name was Paul.
The Lord Jesus chose apostles in the first century. And the Lord Jesus still chooses apostles in our century. His choices, both then and now, are treated much the same way. -
-
Thom,
I love your line of reasoning.
It's called arguing from silence.
It allows you, me, or anybody to invent a scenario and call it valid.
Why, any number of things could have happened. Where does it NOT say that the Apostles traveled to the Americas and preached here? Where does it NOT say that the Apostles zipped around in helium cars? It can be fun an informative to invent anything we want. What else does the book NOT say? -
Pot. Kettle. :rolleyes:
Where does it say that Peter was being impulsive in deciding to replace Judas? That is an "argument from silence". Did not Christ give Peter and the other apostles the authority to "bind and loose" in the Church? That is NOT an argument from silence. -
Thom,
Jesus told the disciples to go to Jerusalem and wait. Peter didn't. He appointed an apostle.
If you want to call that arguing from silence, so be it. -
But they were not waiting for the announcement of the twelfth apostle. They were waiting for the coming of the spirit. And even as they voted they were still waiting, by definition, because they could only wait until He came.
In other words, it is still an argument from silence. -
-
-
Here's a quote from the Reformation apologist Martin Chemnitz on the benefits of ordination:
-
Doubting Thomas,
The LORD changeth not. Jesus Christ, the same yesterday, today and forever. He chose in the OT those who he wanted as his mouthpiece. He chose the 12 disciples and he chose Paul. He is the one who has the authority to choose who will be his mouthpiece. That hasn't changed because he does not change. -
-
1. Apostolic succession ONLY given for Judas.
2. There was ANOTHER group that was "with us the entire time" according to the Apostles so all the "for-Apostles-only" texts that the RCC has tried to come up with - were in fact for a much wider group.
3. The book of Acts was written and published long after the events it describes. And it INCLUDES the death of James and of Judas. It does not describe Apostolic succession for James - only for Judas.
4. Though Paul is included as an Apostle - he is not said to "succeed" anybody in the text of God's Word. His is not "apostolic succession".
5. In the OT the "process" for succession of the High Priest is identified. Nothing at all is said of apostolic successors in the NT - apart from Judas.
Therefore - if anything we should be noting -- Judas' successors.
In Christ,
Bob -
Doubting Thomas,
You are correct. It isn't always God who chooses because man has put himself in the seat of God and has made decisions he doesn't belong making. As Christ said, You didn't choose me, I chose you. That hasn't changed. -
-
It wasn't meant to be cute. It seems to me you don't really believe God personally chooses people today as he did in the OT and when He was in flesh. And as he chose Paul.
-
-
Did his benefits package get lost in the mail? Someone really should let him know what he is missing out on... -
The crowd was there.
In Christ,
Bob
Page 2 of 3