[RnMomof7]

Doctrine ping ...long read but good

[boomop1]

Just a thought, the Apostles follow Jesus where witness to His miracles and teachings but never realized the reasoned He came. Not until Pentecost did their eves open.

[terycarl]

There are direct successors to the apostles...they are called Popes/Catholic Bishops.

[Campion]

The article has nothing to do with “apostolic succession” as understood by traditional Christians (Catholics, Orthodox, trad Anglicans, etc.). It’s a good refutation of those fringe groups which hold that there are modern-day apostles in the church, of whom the Mormons are the most ubiquitous. They don’t call their doctrine “apostolic succession” AFAIK, though, so the title is wrong no matter what.

[beethovenfan]

No.

[metmom]

In order to be an apostle, one had to meet at least three necessary qualifications: (1) an apostle had to be an eyewitness of the resurrected Christ (2) an apostle had to be directly appointed by Jesus Christ and (3) an apostle had to be able to confirm his mission and message with miraculous signs

And yet that's what many of these new apostles say. That they had a *vision* of Christ, he appointed them to the role of apostle and that they can confirm it with miraculous signs.

Problem is, it's all on their say so.

Hardly trustworthy when you consider how soon the enemy was sending false prophets into the early church.

And yet none of these people even allow for the concept of false prophets and if they do, it's someone who opposes them.

[Salvation]

The truth -- The Early Church Fathers on Apostolic Succession - Catholic/Orthodox Caucus