[Ronly Bonly Jones]

No. Not word play. Although an apostle is greater than a bishop, the title subsumes that of bishop -- think of them as the Ur-Bishops, the Original Bishops, from whom our bishops derive their authority, using the authority given the Apostles to replace, first Judas, and then all who followed them, through divine election.

Not a joke. The Apostles were bishops; the Bishops of the Succession are Successors to the Apostles. If it is otherwise then the Apostolic Succession is worthless.

[Aliska]

The derivation and/or delegation of authority I have no problem with.

In the new testament, there is a clear distinction between apostles and bishops. When did they change that to how you are defining it?

They all had similar spiritual powers; I won't argue that point.

[mercy]

****If it is otherwise then the Apostolic Succession is worthless.****

I think history has already proven that Apostolic Succession has no grounding in biblical truth. The chain has been broken so many times I think it is proven never to have been a chain at all. Christ is alive. He has twelve Apostles.