(You)'d love that, wouldn't you, kike?
I'm going to go with:
Your prooftext proves nothing, besides your inability to properly exegete scripture.
That being said, Peter denied Christ 3 times. Christ chose Judas as an apostle. Therefore claiming that the Church has bad priests/bisohps and therefore not true/apostolic is just ridiculous, and a bad argument.
Saying nonsense isn't convincing.
Just FYI. You're not an authority, so you're going to have to come up with something better than a reddit-spacing reeeee.
>Yes Jesus did choose Judas, so why does it sound like you deny Him as an apostle?
I'm not? I'm saying Christ chose Judas, therefore if there are current bishops who are bad (while being not nearly as bad as Judas), that doesn't mean they're not the successors to the apostles.
It's very simple logic, I'm not sure what part of it is confusing to you.
Nothing you said is truthful. You're a heretic blaspheming Christ and His Church. You're lucky I'm being as kind to you as I am, because you deserve nothing less than eternal damnation for leading sheep astray.
Christ? And then the apostles laid hands on him? I don't understand your question.
Christ judged Judas. You are a wicked man.
Protestants are so silly. They say things that everyone believes as if they're the only one to have ever thought of them. The arrogance knows no bounds.
You think it boasts in Christ that He chose Judas, while rejecting the Church today?
Weird. Seems to make no sense to me.
Who chose Judas?
The logic of your "argument," and the logic of "who chose Judas" is exactly the same.
It doesn't prove what you want it to in the case of Judas, and not in the case of Paul.
But please, elucidate me as to your point, and how either demonstrate that apostolic succession, as understood by the Catholic Church, is influenced by your observation.
You quote the Bible about false humility in a post dripping with false humility. You can't make this up.
You're demonically possessed. May Christ have mercy on you.