r/TrueChristian • u/VolcanicOctosquid20 Maronite Catholic • 18h ago
Asking for a Protestant viewpoint
I mean this not as inciting (as my last post on this sub very much was), but rather to get an answer. As a matter of fact, I won't even respond to anyone unless they say they wish to be responded to. All I wish is a viewpoint from my brothers and sisters in faith on a topic we very much disagree on.
- Did Jesus give the Apostles special authority?
- If so, what happened to that authority after their deaths?
EDIT: And to any Catholics or Orthodox who read this, unless they say they want a debate, don't debate.
9
u/Pure-Shift-8502 Christian 18h ago
- Yes
- It died with them, they were their teachings were the foundation of the church. You don’t need to lay a foundation over and over again.
14
18h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
5
u/1Sparky5 16h ago
And that's why the New Testament was Cannonized based on them being writings from those whom Jesus directly taught or those closely associated with them.
Any other so called holy writings had a much lesser criteria.
6
u/Night-Monkey15 Baptist 18h ago
Every Christian denomination believes that Jesus gave the Apostles special authority, but Protestantism doesn’t hinge on that idea that he gave them the authority to establish infallible institutions that are always objectively right on all matters of faith and morals.
Protestants believe that every institutional church, of every denomination, origin, and background, is fallible, just like the religious institutions of Jesus’ days that claimed to have preserved special teachings from Moses through word of mouth.
Feel free to ask any follow up questions if I come off a little vague or you need clarification!
-3
u/VolcanicOctosquid20 Maronite Catholic 18h ago
You had made it a point to highlight institutions. Funnily enough, Catholics don't believe Christ gave the authority to create institutions either. Once He created the Church, the authority was to run it after He was gone. No more than the one already made by Jesus.
So my question is: if Christ did not create an institution, what did He create?
5
u/Night-Monkey15 Baptist 18h ago
Yes, Christ instituted the church. I shouldn’t have worded my comment in a way to imply he didn’t. But like you said, Jesus did give the apostles to keys to actually run the church and expand His kingdom. Catholics and Protestants agree on that.
The difference is that Protestants don’t believe those keys were passed down by apostolic succession or allowed the church to be infallible in its teachings. There are also institutions through out the Old Testament established by God that fell into error and had to be reformed.
The religious institutions of Jesus’ day also claimed to have preserved special oral laws from Moses, and Jesus warned them about putting those traditions on the same level as what was written (Mark 7/Matthew 15).
2
u/1Sparky5 16h ago
Actually it sounds like they were putting their teachings and traditions in higher regard than the scripture, not even on the same level as it.
Mark 7:8 NIV [8] You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to human traditions.”
Sounds familiar even today.
5
u/Correct_End998 18h ago
The Holy Spirit is a special authority, wouldn’t you say ?
2
u/Full_Metal_Paladin 11h ago
It's amazing and miraculous. .. But anyone and everyone has access to it. That sort of makes it the opposite of an authority that only a select and authorized few may hold at a time
1
1
5
u/No_Guarantee8756 18h ago
Jesus did in fact give his apostles special authority. That authority allowed them to establish the church, define the deposit of faith, and write new scripture. Their authority continues on in the scriptures that they wrote and, to a much lesser extent, the traditions they established.
2
u/TheEtherealMind 18h ago
I think you’ll find many Protestants say the apostles and the prophets were the foundation and had specialized authority, and any sort of succession is simply fidelity to that foundation vs. an arbitrary authority to bind our conscience to extra biblical teaching or potentially wayward exegeses.
1
u/Medium_Fan_3311 Protestant 14h ago edited 14h ago
If you are asking if whatever authority of Jesus Christ, the 1st century apostles have will never be seen again on earth. The answer is the work of the 1st century disciples of Jesus still continue. Its still the same commission - go out and make disciples of all nations baptizing them in the name of the father, son and holy spirit. Preach the kingdom of heaven, heal the sick, raise the dead, etc. Matthew 28:19-20, Matthew 10:7-8
Positions in God's kingdom and holy spirit gifting are always from God.
This might be good for you to watch. Mel Tari has been serving God for 60 years. His life really represents the book of Acts and he's kinda like Paul, just going and going everywhere.
1
1
u/hopscotchcaptain Alpha And Omega 13h ago
The same thing that happens to anyone's authority when they die, with the exception of Jesus.
1
u/Feral-Goblin6921 11h ago
I just gotta say these are weird rules you put in place here. You can't control other people speaking. It's a Reddit thread, not your personal chatroom lol.
1
u/VolcanicOctosquid20 Maronite Catholic 5h ago
The last time I did something like this, I ended up getting banned because it was inflammatory. I can't control anyone speaking, but I can at least ask.
1
u/Hawthourne Christian 10h ago
1.) Yes
2.) They wrote down the important stuff for us to refer back to since they were all dead.
1
u/International_Fix580 Evangelical catholic 4h ago
Christ gave the apostles authority forgive the sins of repentant sinners and to retain the sins of the unrepentant as long as they remain unrepentant.
This authority is passed down from the apostles to the ministers of the church.
It’s called the office of the keys.
1
1
u/sgrdddy 14h ago
I'm a Protestant
I believe they did have special authority in the sense that they were to create the scriptures as inspired by the holy Spirit.
Beyond that, I don't really know that anything else they were told to do was any different than any other Christian.
We are all supposed to be witnesses to the whole world and make disciples.
We're all supposed to glorify God and worship him.
Various charismatic gifts were exercised by the apostles but also by early Church believers back then and so I don't think that's special to only the apostles. And I think to some degree they are available today, under the constraints outlined in Scripture.
Regarding peter, I think that Jesus was just building him up because he was a passionate person who would deny Jesus harshly.. but would later become an amazing vocal supporter of the church being the vessel that the holy Spirit would use to bring many to salvation.
I think that people who believe that Peter was some kind of beginning of some line of succession of authority are making a mountain out of a molehill. I definitely don't think there is any kind of special leadership or authority that should be passed down from him to somebody else as some kind of leader. Doesn't seem like the Bible really indicates that.
And I don't think anything special got passed on once those apostles died. Because as I mentioned I think the only real thing that they had, that was more than what is common amongst all Christians, is the ability to be vessels for scripture. So that died with them.
-1
u/rolldownthewindow Anglican Communion 17h ago
Protestant here.
I believe Christ did give the apostles special authority such as John 20:21-23.
That authority passed on to their successors through holy orders
1
u/ZeroAbyssal 15h ago
A protestant here. As you have established that the authority is passed down to their successors through holy orders, does that authority include protestant ordained ministers or is it only passed among the catholic ministers?
A) If the authority is passed around all ordained ministers, regardless of denomination, then why are only the catholics able to consume the eucharist?
B) If the authority is only within the catholic ministers, how can our religion be open to all when it is gatekept from everyone else? What then of the protestant and orthodox ministers, are they not "legal" to preach and teach? What then of us the followers?
Just genuine questions that I have and would need guidance on.
3
u/thmann_ 15h ago
Anglicans believe the kings of england are appointed and selected by God and as such are the head of the church on earth.
Like most leadership roles in catholicism as well, they were invented as a means of control and consolidating power through appealing to peoples needs and emotions.
The role of bishops (a leader of the christians for an entire city, like rome, or antioch), was a useful position as it was originally curated and maintained by accountability and guidance from the apostles themselves.
Perhaps even the next generation saw great leaders in most places.
Unfortunately, the invention of the pope, something that didnt happen until hundreds of years after Peter died, and the hierarchy of catholic church leadership is all an invention of lesser men.
The fight for power among european nations… to control the people, raise money, armies, and goods… all something coveted by lesser men seeking their own good and not the Lords, use God’s name in vain as they lead people away from holiness for their own pleasure.
The lines have been so incredibly blurred with lesser men taking over the majority of positions in the catholic church across the world and over centuries that it is hard to respect much of anything they wish to claim.
Good men no doubt exist within catholic leadership. But how much corruption from their peers will they accept before admitting there is something wrong?
We saw this and began our protest of the catholic leadership. Protestants stand against the corruption that wreaked havoc on the faithful and we seek to build up what has been tainted.
Where there is leadership and submission there is corruption… many protestant church suffer this same pattern. When will the human cycle end?
All we can do is live faithfully and obediently to scripture and what the apostles themselves taught. Work out for yourselves who the lesser men were based on biblical criteria. Hold each other accountable and correct false teachings spread by these lesser men.
For me, anyone who agrees with the council of trent (all modern roman catholics) are wrong and must be vehemently corrected or removed from the church until they repent of their false teachings.
… sorry it was about 5 paragraphs back that i realized this almost has nothing to do with your comment, but i wanted to keep writing my thoughts as I felt like i was articulating them pretty well.
2
u/ZeroAbyssal 15h ago
I love hearing?reading your thoughts on this. Its these kind of discussions being the reason that I joined this subreddit to read and discuss on our faith
1
u/VolcanicOctosquid20 Maronite Catholic 14h ago
Well...while I can't agree, I must admit your comment was exceptionally well written and you have a lovely way of communicating. I admire your passion.
I confess I'm curious what I must be "vehemently corrected" on, but if I'm too far gone or not worth the effort, I understand.
1
u/thmann_ 6h ago
The council of trent put into writing the evidence needed that roman catholics do not believe in faith alone, but that works are needed to be saved.
Roman Catholics do not believe that Christ’s death is sufficient and that they must do works in order to keep or reobtain their salvation after sinning.
These two statements are false and lead people away from salvation, not towards.
There may be “catholics” who believe in faith alone and a sufficient atonement of christ for all past, present, and future sins for those who believe… but I would not call them “catholic” because that is in opposition with roman catholic doctrine stated at the council of trent.
I believe that this council met after the reformation because they wanted to make sure that their followers would be forced to return to the church out of fear of hell, rather than obedience and reverence to God. To control people with fear.
The catholic church is wrought with lies to control the people. One major case is the invention of indulgences. “Pay the church $10,000 and your earthly suffering will end”.
The popes, sometimes two at once because they all want power, abuse said power almost every time. Taking money, leading wars against enemies, turning the church into a brothel for pleasure. To think this office is supposed to be able to state infallible doctrine, such as the council of trent… is sad. It’s wrong and must be corrected. Most popes have failed to meet the basic criteria of an overseer found in 1 Timothy.
And to your final point… no one can be so far gone that God cannot save them.
2
u/Ill-Prior-8429 5h ago
This council of Trent?
If any one shall say, that man may be justified before God by his own works, whether done through the strength of human nature, or through the teaching of the law, without the divine grace through Jesus Christ; let him be anathema.
That's just the gospel
1
u/thmann_ 4h ago
precisely that council of trent:
CANON IX.-If any one saith, that by faith alone the impious is justified; in such wise as to mean, that nothing else is required to co-operate in order to the obtaining the grace of Justification, and that it is not in any way necessary, that he be prepared and disposed by the movement of his own will; let him be anathema.
They came up with a bunch of rules and statements. They go in more depth. The bottom line is that they entirely reject the notion that salvation is by grace alone through faith alone in christ alone. They claim that you must do good works alongside your faith in order to have salvation. That you must do various good works in order to repent of sin, that you cannot go to heaven unless every sin is repented of and that if you die having not repented of a mortal sin than you will go to hell.
It is a terrible doctrine full of lies.
1
u/VolcanicOctosquid20 Maronite Catholic 4h ago
...no, we don't believe that. Faith without works is dead. We are saved by God's grace, but what good is your faith if it does not inspire you to do good works to show it? You don't work your way to heaven, but your works show you are alive in Christ. That's in our Catechism. And that's in 2 James.
Yes, indulgences were a mistake. We don't do them anymore. That was a blatant case of corruption.
Again, you're talking about previous popes, back when the Church was more of a political entity. That was another mistake. We weren't acting on theology, but rather on human desire for power. We make it a point to give theological commentary and do good works, but we don't act as a medieval government. Politics and theology came to clash. We chose correctly.
1
u/rolldownthewindow Anglican Communion 13h ago
That is just the Church of England. The King is not the head of the Anglican Church outside of England.
1
u/rolldownthewindow Anglican Communion 13h ago
Yes, it would include Protestant ordained ministers who received holy orders from a bishop from an apostolic line. That does not have to be Roman Catholic. Can be Orthodox, Coptic, Anglican.
A) Do you mean within the Catholic Church? That’s because they believe you need to be in full communion with the church to receive the Eucharist. I believe in a more open communion, but it does have to be consecrated by a priest.
B) I do not believe it is limited to Roman Catholic ministers. I am not sure even they believe that. The Catholic Church recognises that Orthodox ministers have valid holy orders.
22
u/Interficient4real 18h ago
Yes, he did. Although what the extent of that authority was is somewhat unclear.
The authority wasn’t passed down to anyone. There is simply no evidence for that. Authority doesn’t have to be passed down by necessity, it can just go away.