2007-11-27 11:21:19 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
I believe it was.thats why it still exists. and has thru the centureys
2007-11-28 11:57:46 · answer #1 · answered by regina 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
They were in the company of the Paraclete, and so did as was directed by the Holy Spirit. Yes, I do believe that there was the beginning of the succession. Not all ordinations were good ones. Some were down-right nepotism. But lessons were learned nevertheless, and all was within the auspices of the Holy Spirit. For one reason or other. Probably for means of humility. So that we do not get religious pride (vile, very vile)
2007-11-27 19:33:15 · answer #2 · answered by Shinigami 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because there needed to be 12 Apostles (they represented the 12 tribes of Israel). Since they had to keep teaching the truth for all time and not just for that generation they had to choose another person when one died or fell away. I could go into more detail but unless you are big on history lessons you may not be all that interested.
2007-11-27 19:27:30 · answer #3 · answered by akstewgal 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
They didn't choose another, God did. Nothing happens by chance, proverbs says every decision from the lot that is cast comes from God, so therefore they didn't choose, God did. Many people today believe that things do happen by chance, and therefore it is necessary to hold votes and such. Oh and for the record, God can raise sons of Abraham from stones if he wanted to, therefore apostolic lineage is irrelevant, since God chooses apostles, not man. This is clearly witnessed in the verse prior to Acts 13:3
2007-11-27 19:27:48 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, it is. Look throughout the Book of Acts....you will see:
Acts 1:15-26 - the first thing Peter does after Jesus ascends into heaven is implement apostolic succession. Matthias is ordained with full apostolic authority. Only the Catholic Church can demonstrate an unbroken apostolic lineage to the apostles in union with Peter through the sacrament of ordination and thereby claim to teach with Christ's own authority.
Acts 1:20 - a successor of Judas is chosen. The authority of his office (his "bishopric") is respected notwithstanding his egregious sin. The necessity to have apostolic succession in order for the Church to survive was understood by all. God never said, "I'll give you leaders with authority for about 400 years, but after the Bible is compiled, you are all on your own."
Acts 1:22 - literally, "one must be ordained" to be a witness with us of His resurrection. Apostolic ordination is required in order to teach with Christ's authority.
Acts 6:6 - apostolic authority is transferred through the laying on of hands (ordination). This authority has transferred beyond the original twelve apostles as the Church has grown.
Acts 9:17-19 - even Paul, who was directly chosen by Christ, only becomes a minister after the laying on of hands by a bishop. This is a powerful proof-text for the necessity of sacramental ordination in order to be a legitimate successor of the apostles.
Acts 13:3 - apostolic authority is transferred through the laying on of hands (ordination). This authority must come from a Catholic bishop.
Acts 14:23 - the apostles and newly-ordained men appointed elders to have authority throughout the Church.
Acts 15:22-27 - preachers of the Word must be sent by the bishops in union with the Church. We must trace this authority to the apostles.
2007-11-27 19:27:40 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The Quorum of the Twelve Apostles means exactly what it says--no more, no less. I believe it was Mathias that was chosen by revelation and total agreement to replace Judas.
We have that same organization today in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, all bearing the higher priesthood of God as prophets, seers, and revelators.
2007-11-27 19:38:12 · answer #6 · answered by Guitarpicker 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Interesting q.
I for one do not believe that they were to do that .
Jesus told them "Wait in Jerusalem until I send the Holy Spirit"
Throwing some dice to find out who should take Judas' place is not waiting.
Later, Paul is chosen by Jesus himself to be an apostle.
If the first one was correct, what was the need for a 13th?
Was Jesus wrong?
2007-11-27 19:35:14 · answer #7 · answered by Gypsy Priest 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Mattias was chosen to replace Judas thereby restoring the twelve. There is NO apostolic succession beyond that.
2007-11-27 19:25:20 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, it was not succession. It was because of a prophetic statement that ONLY ONE would be replaced. Consider the actual passage in Acts 1.
2007-11-27 19:31:46 · answer #9 · answered by Cuchulain 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Twelve is a very significant number in God's order
too lengthy to post here
you might want to research
12 tribes
twelve elders
12 apostles
etc:
2007-11-27 19:26:29 · answer #10 · answered by sego lily 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋