“Those were Peter’s own words.”
I am not arguing that.
“What men today have walked with Jesus and the apostles for those three years and have been a witness to he resurrection?”
That was not the argument either.
“No men after that generation died out qualified for the post.”
Once again, not the argument.
“You can’t have a succession of apostles if you don’t have anyone qualified to be one. It just doesn’t work.”
The Apostles were given the authority by Christ to appoint their successors, as they did after the death of Judas. This authority was passed on to their successors.
This is where the argument lies. I am not arguing that there exist Apostles in the narrow sense, that they exist today. I am arguing that the Apostles had the authority to appoint their successors and that their successors had the authority to do the same.
For evidence, just look at the great number of books in the Canon written by Matthias. (Doh!!!!)
Doesn't God make all of His great decisions by drawing lots? /s
You have a problem with that scenario. Unless you believe that all priests are in that line of “apostolic succession” your line of succession died off. Each Pope does not appoint his own successor. Each Pope is selected by those who have not been Pope so would not have been in the “line of succession”. After the original Apostles died the Popes of the CC have been appointed by others not in that line.