So, then, you in fact have no bishop. So much for your claim to be a member of Christ's one historic Church---the Body of Christ.
if you are correct then*Apostolic Succession would appear to be a tradition of man, rather than a true doctrine of the Church.Therefore, while I do not think it is necessarily sinful to trace the leaders in the Church, I do not see*Apostolic Seccession*as necessary for God's authority to be meaningful and effective.*Apostolic Succession*would not seem to be a powerful argument against Protestantism, but possibly a weakness for the RCC - in that it can allow error into the Church (RCC teaches that the Pope when speaking ex cathedra, as well as the church when met in ecumenical council, can never err and therfore it leaves no room for examination of their words and laws - which is not consistent with the depravity of man which I now see traced in the OT and NT).
*Jesus said, "And I tell you that you are Peter [PETROS], and on this rock [PETRA] I will build my Church." There are two different, but related, Greek words used in this text. According to the Greek Lexicon, PETROS is "a rock or a stone," whereas PETRA is "a rock, cliff, or ledge." They are similar, but not the same. Jesus illustrates the meaning of PETRA elsewhere, as a massive foundational rock saying: "Therefore everyone who hears these words of mine and puts them into practice is like a wise man who built his house on the rock [PETRA]" (Matt. 7:24). There is a difference between a pebble [PETROS] and a complete foundation [PETRA].*
Why did Jesus use this play on words? You made it lucid that if the Holy Spirit desired to make it absolutely clear that He was building His church on the son of Jonah, why did He not simply say, "And I tell you that you are Peter [PETROS], and on this rock [PETROS] I will build my Church?" Since this is*not*the words the Holy Spirit choose, this must*not*be what the Holy Spirit means. At the very least, we can say that the rock [PETRA] upon which the Church is built refers to something other than Peter [PETROS], as an individual.
Why did Christ insist on this distinction? You appealed to St. Augustine. With integrity you showed that Augustine once maintained that Peter was "the Rock." However, then you revealed St. Augustine's humility and own confession:
In a passage in this book, I said about the Apostle Peter: 'On him as on a rock the Church was built'...But I know that very frequently at a later time, I so explained what the Lord said: 'Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church,'*that it be understood as built upon Him whom Peter confessed saying: 'Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God,'*and so Peter, called after this rock, represented the person of the Church which is built upon this rock, and has received 'the keys of the kingdom of heaven.' For, 'Thou art Peter' and not 'Thou art the rock' was said to him. But 'the rock was Christ,' in confessing whom, as also the whole Church confesses, Simon was called Peter. But let the reader decide which of these two opinions is the more probable (The Fathers of the Church*(Washington D.C., Catholic University, 1968), Saint Augustine,*The Retractations, Chapter 20.1).
You then quoted William Webster:
Clearly Augustine is repudiating a previously held position, adopting the view that the rock was Christ and not Peter. This became his consistent position. He does leave the interpretation open for individual readers to decide which was the more probable interpretation but it is clear what he has concluded the interpretation should be and that he believes the view that the rock is Christ is the correct one (The Church Fathers' Interpretation of the Rock of Matthew*16:18).
In the work entitled,*The Works of Saint Augustine, this is clear:
And I tell you...'You are Peter, Rocky, and on this rock I shall build my Church, and the gates of the underworld will not conquer her. To you shall I give the keys of the kingdom. Whatever you bind on earth shall also be bound in heaven; whatever you loose on earth shall also be loosed in heaven' (Mt 16:15-19). In Peter, Rocky, we see our attention drawn to the rock. Now the apostle Paul says about the former people, 'They drank from the spiritual rock that was following them; but the rock was Christ' (1 Cor 10:4).*So this disciple is called Rocky from the rock, like Christian from Christ...Why have I wanted to make this little introduction? In order to suggest to you that in Peter the Church is to be recognized.*Christ, you see, built his Church not on a man but on Peter's confession. What is Peter's confession? 'You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.' There's the rock for you, there's the foundation, there's where the Church has been built, which the gates of the underworld cannot conquer*(John Rotelle, Ed.,*The Works of Saint Augustine*(New Rochelle: New City Press, 1993), Sermons, Vol. 6, Sermon 229P.1, p. 327).
Therefore, the pebble is Peter's confession and the Rock is the foundation Jesus Christ! To put it in your words, in the holiest of senses you said, "Peter was a chip off the old block." Peter was a PETROS off the old PETRA (the Ancient of Days Dan. 7:9, 13, 22). In other words, by the Spirit of God, Peter [PETROS] was confessing Christ [PETRA]. Peter was a part of the body of Christ by Spirit confession. Upon this the Lord is building His church. Moreover, in this, Peter is being addressed as a representative of all believers not as an individual Pope. In bears repeating: By the Spirit of God many people confess Christ (Matt. 10:32; John*3:1-8; 6:68-69, 11:27; Rom. 10:9-10; 1 Cor. 12:3; 1 Tim. 6:12; 1 John*2:23; 4:2-3, 15; Rev. 1:9, etc.).*
Moreover, Peter is NOT the only one who has power to forgive. This is established in John*20:22-23 when Jesus breathed upon the disciples and said, "Receive the Holy Spirit.If you forgive anyone his sins, they are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven." Moreover, Luke records on Pentecost, "But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth" (Acts*1:8). The rest of the apostles received the same authority as Peter. Related to this, the Church itself has this authority. In Matthew*18:18 Jesus says to the Church, "I tell you the truth, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven." In reality, these keys are the delegated power of Christ to His Church (Rev. 3:7) - not just the Pope and Bishops.*
To this, in your last argument, you pointed out that Acts*20:17 and 28 appears to authorize the authority of elders over a local congregation, but no authority over the Church universal. In addition, in 2 Timothy*2:2, you explained that a succession of teachers was the goal and that nothing in this passage supported a known unbreakable succession of leaders whose authority was to be unquestioned (cf. Gal 2:11-21). Furthermore, in Acts*12:1-2, when the apostle James was beheaded, Scripture records no successor appointed to replace him. Moreover, an apostasy was foretold by the apostles (1 Tim. 4:1-3; 2 Thess. 2:1-3; 2 Pet. 2:1-3). Even some from the number the apostles taught some would fall away (Acts*20:29-30) and those who taught differently from the apostles were to be rejected (Gal. 1:6-9). Therefore, appointment by an Apostle did*notnecessarily a guarantee the true teaching of God's Word (Acts*15:24; 1 John*2:19).
this is for those who learned not to be decived by cruciform who can't read the bible alone:
http://reformedanswers.org/answer.asp/file/40203