But for the first 1500 years of Church history, the test was apostolicity; who had been ordained in succession from the Apostles.
= = =
Not my construction on reality. Sounds like historical revisionism, to me.
The Little Pebble wasn't adequate regardless of the politics.
But even IF THAT WERE [which I'm convinced it wasn't] the way things started out in AD 50 or 70 or whatever . . . it seems clear to me that at least for great chunks of time . . . the anointing has been lifted . . . as it has with all other organizations and groups.
And, regardless of kosher doctrine; regardless of human works of righteousness as filthy as a minstral rag; regardless of lineage; regardless of organizational purity . . .
WHEN THE ANOINTING IS LIFTED, REMOVED . . . all else is chaff . . . flesh . . . noneternal.
It sounds to me like you are not sure, which shows that you haven't studied this issue in relation to Church history. Before you go speculating about whether this is "historical revisionism", dig into early Church history, including the fathers. You won't find sola scriptura anywhere. A good book on this subject is Robert Sungenis's Not By Scripture Alone
-A8
This is the same kind of deism that underlies Mormonism: God abandoned His Church for 1800 years, and Joseph Smith restored the Church to the purity that it once had in the Apostolic period.
-A8