History according to Anderson

Is this just Baptist shitposting or do they unironically believe this?

Attached: 8d830efdc4426104cb2208c06cbdc8bd6d17a295da215c4cf7223dbd88f71fc0.jpg (447x444, 15.75K)

Does that Baptistbro still have the pasta about there being no heresies or division until Martin Luther, King James and John Calvin teamed up to destroy Christendom?

Anderson is the most autistic preacher I've ever seen.

Ha no, apostolic tradition is found nowhere in the Bible.
also

Attached: BD5B7294-8229-4148-8ECD-5707CC6D543F.jpeg (745x1053, 65.51K)

Acts 14:23
23 And when they had ordained them elders in every church, and had prayed with fasting, they commended them to the Lord, on whom they believed.

Yeah certainly not by Jesus Himself. We already know what Jesus said doesn't matter against Baptist teachings

That shows ordination.

Apostolic succession isnt demonstrated until Irenaeus invokes it against the marcosians in against heresies.

That said, if succession isnt real, one might as well be a gnostic, so its not a good argument for a prot to use…

So where does that say Peter chose someone to rule on his throne for 2000 years and is infallible and people to bow to him?

You're right isn't. Matthew 16 isn't apostolic succession.

I'm Orthodox, you'd have to ask a Catholic.

Wait, do KJV'ists actually believe that it's the only true translation? I thought this was a meme

No of course not. Only Ruckmanites believe that. For most of us, it's just the only known translation in English that doesn't have problems with it.

lad

No. Actually the first statement of Apostolic Succession comes from 1Clement, dated AD80

he is also making the point that this system was appointed by Christ and is shown in Acts when they are appointing Bishops and priests at each of the places they visit

Yes. But we know their roles are the new counterparts to the priesthood of the OT and the laity cannot do what is essentially their function.

Never mind that the bible was compiled through the discernment of the apostolic church. Do people like Anderson just suppose that evil men were at the council of Nicea and God used them to put together the Bible? Preposterous.

I'm surprised anyone can be a protestant.

scripture alone, trashcan?

Furthermore why do Sola Scriptura cucks even think along the lines they do about the devil? The KJV only has a few lines about some kind of adversary but the idea of the character who is cast down from heaven for his rebellion is found in The Book of Enoch and is preserved in the doctrine of the apostolic church. Daily reminder Luther defaced his bible.

Well yes.

Attached: Laugh jap drama.webm (3264x2448 414.87 KB, 1.09M)

The Petrine See had some primacy, that we know and everyone agrees.
Everything else is stuff the Joint Commisions are still debating, and everyone would be glad if that was the only thing dividing us.

Attached: 8-wFoOPa_400x400.jpg (384x384, 21.36K)

Nobody but fringe baptists take this kind of blatant revisionism seriously dude. Please for once just back up the claims that baptists existed before the 1400's, or that any of these indicated churches were congregationalist, sola scriptura, sola fide believers baptists, much less unbroken in their tradition.

2 Thess 2:15
Therefore, brethren, stand fast; and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word, or by our epistle.

Attached: unnamed.jpg (313x470, 36.73K)