Difference between Catholic and Protestant.

[BreadOfLife]

My apologies, perhaps it was Mary.

Here is the error made by the early church:

Just as Moses set life and death before Israel just prior to the entering of the promised land (Deuteronomy 30:19) foreshadowing the greater entering into the promises of God, Jesus did much the same for the church just before the entering began with Him as firstfruits:

When Jesus came into the region of Caesarea Philippi, He asked His disciples, saying, “Who do men say that I, the Son of Man, am?”
14 So they said, “Some say John the Baptist, some Elijah, and others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.” 15 He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” 16 Simon Peter answered and said, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” 17 Jesus answered and said to him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in heaven. 18 And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it. 19 And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.” Matthew 16:13-19
​

Jesus pointedly made a distinction between flesh and blood "and" His Father (life and death) giving exception to flesh and blood, speaking "also" to and of Peter. Then "also" says regarding which rock He would build His church upon, already having given the terms of what is included as "not" flesh and blood: Two choices, two possible courses or paths to follow, by two narratives, one life and one death.

But the early church fathers--even the apostles, could not yet "bear" all that He had to say to them; and therefore not fully understanding they assumed He meant He would build His church upon flesh and blood, even though He pointed out that was not how it would occur, first giving the example of what it was not.

Thus, just as Peter came to foretell of false teachers entering into the church--they did; and just as Paul also told of believing a "lie" and "strong delusion" of "great apostacy" this too has also come to fruition."

Now, does that mean that both courses of action, both that of flesh and blood and alternatively that of what comes spiritually from the Father, did not ensue...just as it also did with Israel? No, certainly not--both did ensue...and we can know this by the precedence provided us by Israel, just as it was also written of them...both of which end in crucifixion--of His body, and since then, His spirit: "However, the spiritual is not first, but the natural, and afterward the spiritual."

But what of the Catholic church--did they not carry the water of the gospel? Yes, of course, and your and their claims are greatly true. But what was shamefully missed then, has been missed all along, even to the end. But what of the millions who have and do love Jesus and wanted nothing more than to come to Him and to serve Him--are they all to receive death? Yes, of course, all who are flesh and blood die. All shall receive their reward. Even so, they too are like Israel who believed the Priests appointed over them, some victims, some willful participants. Such is the dividing of the sheep from the goats.​

That sounds like a fanciful theory – but not one that makes a whole lotta sense, unless you believe that the Scriptures can only be understood by a mathematician or a detective.
No – it’s simpler than that,

In Matt. 16:18, Jesus was addressing Simon bar Jonah and called him “Kepha”, which is Aramaic for “Rock”. This is why Paul refers to him as “Cephas” in his letters, not Peter. Cephas is a Greek transliteration of the Aramaic, Kepha.

In Rev. 21, we read about the Holy city coming out of Heaven and how it is built upon TWELVE foundations – with the name of one of the TWELVE Apostles on each foundation.
Foundations are made of stone – and it’s NOT a stretch to figure out whose name is on the FIRST foundation.

- At the Last Supper (Luke 22:31-32), Jesus told Peter that He prayed for HIM alone – and that he must strengthen his brothers when the time came.
- In John 21:15-19, Jesus reinstates Peter by asking Him – and him ALONE to Feed His Lambs c and Tend His Sheep.
- In Acts 2, on the Day of Pentecost – it is Peter who speaks to the crowd on behalf of the Church.
- In Acts 5:2-11 – Peter utters the first anathema against Ananias and Sapphira.
- In Acts 9:40, it is Peter who first raises the dead
- In Acts 10:1-6, Cornelius is told by an angel to seek out Peter for instruction in Christianity.
And on and on . . .

The Early Church wasn’t in “error” – it was your Protestant Fathers who fell into error when they rejected these Biblical truths some 1500 years later.

 

[amigo de christo]

No Scott – I don’t believe you’ve shown me any “errors” of the Early Church.
You must be thinking of someone else.

Also – I wasn’t referring to YOU – but to @amigo de christo who hasn’t shown me ANYTHING but his ignorant opinions . . .

You actually did bring up something rather interesting . And even as Me and my dear sister were reading the bible
i kept getting unctioned to bring this back up to you .
SO here goes .
You basically said its too bad i did not bring up the verse right before timothy three sixteen .
That is a good point . Even they use that fifteenth verse to keep their own men and women as slaves to the bondage
of their leadership . OH yes . THEY TOO say they are the church . And they too make the same cliam
and use scripture to point to their own leadership . BUT i bet you know THEY AINT the one true church .
AND YET you just tried to use the same verse fifteen as a means to try and support why we too should heed the leadership
of the CC . I bet even mormons can do the same . SEE anyone can use that fifteenth verse to try and justify
their own leadership . SEE i notice a lot that do this . They often bring scriptural reminders , YET DO SO
to try and bring folks UNDER THEIR LEADERSHIP . You are no different . I Know the churches need leadership
and that folks need to heed that authority and leadership . BUT what i also know is
NOT IF THE LEADERSHIP IS tanked . SO now you see the problem .
We should use scripture to support that which is true , NOT support false leadership , BUT TRUE LEADERSHIP .
Till the CC ceases with its deadly errors , I wont be sitting under it .
SO lets try the first one . THIS prayer to saints , to mary , to angels .
IF the CC truly sat under CHRIST and truly held to the pattern Peter taught . IT Would be following the same example of
PETER while he lived . HE not only never called for men to kneel before him . HE ACTUALLY SAID DONT DO IT
i am but a man . So why do the popes do so and try and do it in the bishopric of peter . WHEN EVEN PETER WOULD HAVE REBUKED
such a thing . That aint the only thing they do in error . I know the JW teach some serious damanable heresays
AND I KNOW the mormons do . THUS i dont sit under them either . TIME to clean house .

 

[Phoneman777]

Your “statistics” are complete nonsense and MOT official;, by your OWN admission.

YOU stated that you “heard” these “facts” and percentages from a priest.
And as much as you LIE on this forum – you are NOT to be believed.

As I stated before – I will go with the ACTUAL FBI and Insurance statistics delineated in Philip Jenkins’ book, Pedophiles and Priests. And not ONLY do the statistics show that, although many of the charges were REAL – mane more were FALSE and simply an attempt to squeeze money out of the Church.
So, YOUR “6%” goes right down the statistical toilet.

Finally – I find it COMICAL than a member of the SDA sect who's been sucked in by the wacky drivel of an obvious mental case like Ellen White has the GALL to judge who is worthy of being considered a “Legitimate denomination” . . .

DB, you're completely off base. The 6 percent number comes from over 30 years of hands on research by a former priest/professional psychologist Richard Sipe who worked directly with guilty priests at "treatment centers" run by the church. Understand? And he isn't the only one saying it. At one of your churches general conference gatherings, attempts were made to make know to all in attendance the "millions of dollars liability" problem but the issue was denied inclusion on the Official Agenda - your leadership is content to condone, promote, and protect! I'm not pulling this stuff out of thin air, my info is backed up by solid data.

I don't care what the FBI numbers are until I see how they're broken down. I'm not going to allow you or them to sully the good name of Protestantism with "evidence" that is bound up in "professional predators" that use Protestantism as a front. How would you like it if I pointed to all the pervert in the New Orleans French Quarter as "catholic abusers" seeing that New Orleans is a bastion for Catholicism? But, you know full well that's unnecessary: the priesthood itself is doing such a fine job of sexually abusing kids, they don't need the kind of statistical help that's used against Protestantism.

 

[ScottA]

That sounds like a fanciful theory – but not one that makes a whole lotta sense, unless you believe that the Scriptures can only be understood by a mathematician or a detective.
No – it’s simpler than that,

In Matt. 16:18, Jesus was addressing Simon bar Jonah and called him “Kepha”, which is Aramaic for “Rock”. This is why Paul refers to him as “Cephas” in his letters, not Peter. Cephas is a Greek transliteration of the Aramaic, Kepha.

In Rev. 21, we read about the Holy city coming out of Heaven and how it is built upon TWELVE foundations – with the name of one of the TWELVE Apostles on each foundation.
Foundations are made of stone – and it’s NOT a stretch to figure out whose name is on the FIRST foundation.

- At the Last Supper (Luke 22:31-32), Jesus told Peter that He prayed for HIM alone – and that he must strengthen his brothers when the time came.
- In John 21:15-19, Jesus reinstates Peter by asking Him – and him ALONE to Feed His Lambs c and Tend His Sheep.
- In Acts 2, on the Day of Pentecost – it is Peter who speaks to the crowd on behalf of the Church.
- In Acts 5:2-11 – Peter utters the first anathema against Ananias and Sapphira.
- In Acts 9:40, it is Peter who first raises the dead
- In Acts 10:1-6, Cornelius is told by an angel to seek out Peter for instruction in Christianity.
And on and on . . .

The Early Church wasn’t in “error” – it was your Protestant Fathers who fell into error when they rejected these Biblical truths some 1500 years later.

Not by a mathematician per se, but rather by He who created the Heavens and the earth. Simple indeed.

 

[Brakelite]

It is error to maintain that "The [Catholic] Church has the right to require that the Catholic religion shall be the ONLY religion of the State, to the exclusion of all others"... "Cursed be those who assert liberty of conscience and of worship", and "such that maintain that the church may not employ force." ~Pope Pius ix (1846-1878).

Your fake quote can't be found on line.

It is error to claim that ...
"In the present day, it is no longer expedient that the Catholic religion should be held as the only religion of the State, to the exclusion of all other forms of worship". Allocution “Nemo vestrum,” July 26, 1855
Also see syllabus of errors, 77

Syllabus of errors.24. The Church has not the power of using force, nor has she any temporal power, direct or indirect. — Apostolic Letter “Ad Apostolicae,” Aug. 22, 1851.

 

[BreadOfLife]

You actually did bring up something rather interesting . And even as Me and my dear sister were reading the bible
i kept getting unctioned to bring this back up to you .
SO here goes .
You basically said its too bad i did not bring up the verse right before timothy three sixteen .
That is a good point . Even they use that fifteenth verse to keep their own men and women as slaves to the bondage
of their leadership . OH yes . THEY TOO say they are the church . And they too make the same cliam
and use scripture to point to their own leadership . BUT i bet you know THEY AINT the one true church .
AND YET you just tried to use the same verse fifteen as a means to try and support why we too should heed the leadership
of the CC . I bet even mormons can do the same . SEE anyone can use that fifteenth verse to try and justify
their own leadership . SEE i notice a lot that do this . They often bring scriptural reminders , YET DO SO
to try and bring folks UNDER THEIR LEADERSHIP . You are no different . I Know the churches need leadership
and that folks need to heed that authority and leadership . BUT what i also know is
NOT IF THE LEADERSHIP IS tanked . SO now you see the problem .
We should use scripture to support that which is true , NOT support false leadership , BUT TRUE LEADERSHIP .
Till the CC ceases with its deadly errors , I wont be sitting under it .
SO lets try the first one . THIS prayer to saints , to mary , to angels .
IF the CC truly sat under CHRIST and truly held to the pattern Peter taught . IT Would be following the same example of
PETER while he lived . HE not only never called for men to kneel before him . HE ACTUALLY SAID DONT DO IT
i am but a man . So why do the popes do so and try and do it in the bishopric of peter . WHEN EVEN PETER WOULD HAVE REBUKED
such a thing . That aint the only thing they do in error . I know the JW teach some serious damanable heresays
AND I KNOW the mormons do . THUS i dont sit under them either . TIME to clean house .

Once again - I have NO idea what you're talking about.
Your rants have become so broken and random, they would maje morse sense if they were written in Chinese.

For instance - who are "THEY"??

And your idiotic comparison of the Catholic Church to the Mormon Church is asinine.
The LDS Church was established by a MAN in the 19th century.
the Catholic Church was established by CHRIST in the First century.

Please read your posts before sending them out . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

DB, you're completely off base. The 6 percent number comes from over 30 years of hands on research by a former priest/professional psychologist Richard Sipe who worked directly with guilty priests at "treatment centers" run by the church. Understand? And he isn't the only one saying it. At one of your churches general conference gatherings, attempts were made to make know to all in attendance the "millions of dollars liability" problem but the issue was denied inclusion on the Official Agenda - your leadership is content to condone, promote, and protect! I'm not pulling this stuff out of thin air, my info is backed up by solid data.

I don't care what the FBI numbers are until I see how they're broken down. I'm not going to allow you or them to sully the good name of Protestantism with "evidence" that is bound up in "professional predators" that use Protestantism as a front. How would you like it if I pointed to all the pervert in the New Orleans French Quarter as "catholic abusers" seeing that New Orleans is a bastion for Catholicism? But, you know full well that's unnecessary: the priesthood itself is doing such a fine job of sexually abusing kids, they don't need the kind of statistical help that's used against Protestantism.

It's obvious you're NOT interested in statistical facts from the FBI or the insurance companies - or ANYBODY else who disagrees with yoiur warped SDA hatred of the Catholiuc Church.

And I;m NOT the one trying to "sully the good namr of Protestantism" with these facts.
ALL of my sources were either from PROTESTANT or secular experts.
NONE were from Catholic sources.

Go BACK to my last post and read the name of the book (Pedipholes and Piests) I referenced from the PROTESTANT author, Philip Jenkins - then READ the headlines I pulled randomly off the interned news sources.

Your denial is DEEP and disturbung . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

Not by a mathematician per se, but rather by He who created the Heavens and the earth. Simple indeed.

That's my point.
The truth of Matt. 16:18, when read in CONTEXT with the rest of the NT is NOT as convoluted and mysterious as you have laid it out.

It's a LOT more simple to understand when you cross reference it with the OT TYPE that prefigured it:
Isaiah 22:20-22
“In that day I will summon my servant, Eliakim son of Hilkiah. I will clothe him with your robe and fasten your sash around him and hand your authority over to him. He will be a father to those who live in Jerusalem and to the people of Judah. I will place on his shoulder the key to the house of David; what he opens no one can shut, and what he shuts no one can open.

Matt. 16:18-19
And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”

 

[1stCenturyLady]

I created a thread to discuss what sin is. And I found that my understanding of sin was vague. But now I have a clear understanding. With that I have grown beyond some churches. I watch Catholic mass online and sometimes attend the parish down the road. But they don't have married clergy so I find them not following biblical teachings.

That lead me to the protestants. But I'm wondering how they differ from the Catholics. I'm somewhat familiar with the Catholic denomination and don't accept all of it. Would I fit better in a protestant denomination?

Read the letters Jesus wrote to the Catholic/Orthodox church age - Thyatira at the end of Revelation 2 (Jezebel is the old name representing the pagan religion of the goddess and child that the original Jezebel was a high priestess in) This is why you can't find any references of the assumption of Mary or any other holy traditions regarding Jesus' mother in the New Testament. The Church just took the present goddess and child, Venus and Cupid and renamed them Mary and Jesus. This was done two emperors after Constantine when paganism was outlawed, and they needed a way to initiate all these pagans into the Churches. Many other pagan trappings were also brought into the Church. So NEVER pray to Mary, or any other dead human. Only Jesus is the true Mediator between the Father and us. Yes, Mary bore Him, but she never shed an ounce of blood for you to be venerated like she has been. Jesus hates that practice; otherwise He would not have called this goddess Jezebel.

...and the letter to the Protestant Reformation era - Sardis at the beginning of Revelation 3. You will see that there were some very unholy doctrines first brought into this age that Jesus calls "dead." But notice that 200 years (known church history) after the start of this age holiness was also reinstated from the 1st century. So pick wisely.

 

[Phoneman777]

It's obvious you're NOT interested in statistical facts from the FBI or the insurance companies - or ANYBODY else who disagrees with yoiur warped SDA hatred of the Catholiuc Church.

And I;m NOT the one trying to "sully the good namr of Protestantism" with these facts.
ALL of my sources were either from PROTESTANT or secular experts.
NONE were from Catholic sources.

Go BACK to my last post and read the name of the book (Pedipholes and Piests) I referenced from the PROTESTANT author, Philip Jenkins - then READ the headlines I pulled randomly off the interned news sources.

Your denial is DEEP and disturbung . . .

Don't be emotional. Tell me, how many of those FBI and insurance claims pertained to bonafine Protestant ministers, and how many to wolves in sheep's clothing? You'll find that the numbers pale in comparison to that of the priests.

 

[Illuminator]

Protestants study the Bible individually, either at home or collectively within their faith community. This is well and good.
Catholics study the Bible individually at home, as most practicing Catholics have a Bible in their homes the same as Protestants.
Catholics celebrate the Bible in public liturgy. It's been that way since the beginning of Christianity because most of the population could not read.
There is more "Bible" in one Mass than in a month of Protestant sermons, if anyone cares to look.
The highlights of the Bible are proclaimed over a 1 year cycle, and most of the Bible is read aloud (about 97%) over a 3 year cycle.
Faith comes by hearing and by hearing from the Word of God (Romans 10:17). Emphasis is on hearing, but not to the exclusion of reading.

Catechism of the Catholic Church
Article 3
SACRED SCRIPTURE

I. Christ - The Unique Word of Sacred Scripture

101 In order to reveal himself to men, in the condescension of his goodness God speaks to them in human words: "Indeed the words of God, expressed in the words of men, are in every way like human language, just as the Word of the eternal Father, when he took on himself the flesh of human weakness, became like men."63

102 Through all the words of Sacred Scripture, God speaks only one single Word, his one Utterance in whom he expresses himself completely:64

You recall that one and the same Word of God extends throughout Scripture, that it is one and the same Utterance that resounds in the mouths of all the sacred writers, since he who was in the beginning God with God has no need of separate syllables; for he is not subject to time.65

103 For this reason, the Church has always venerated the Scriptures as she venerates the Lord's Body. She never ceases to present to the faithful the bread of life, taken from the one table of God's Word and Christ's Body.66

104 In Sacred Scripture, the Church constantly finds her nourishment and her strength, for she welcomes it not as a human word, "but as what it really is, the word of God".67 "In the sacred books, the Father who is in heaven comes lovingly to meet his children, and talks with them."68

footnotes expanded:
63 DV 13.

13. In Sacred Scripture, therefore, while the truth and holiness of God always remains intact, the marvelous "condescension" of eternal wisdom is clearly shown, "that we may learn the gentle kindness of God, which words cannot express, and how far He has gone in adapting His language with thoughtful concern for our weak human nature." (11) For the words of God, expressed in human language, have been made like human discourse, just as the word of the eternal Father, when He took to Himself the flesh of human weakness, was in every way made like men.​

64 Cf. Hebrews 1:1-3
65 St. Augustine, En. in Psalm 103, 4, 1: PL 37, 1378; cf. Psalm 104; John 1:1
66 Cf. DV 21.

21. The Church has always venerated the divine Scriptures just as she venerates the body of the Lord, since, especially in the sacred liturgy, she unceasingly receives and offers to the faithful the bread of life from the table both of God's word and of Christ's body. She has always maintained them, and continues to do so, together with sacred tradition, as the supreme rule of faith, since, as inspired by God and committed once and for all to writing, they impart the word of God Himself without change, and make the voice of the Holy Spirit resound in the words of the prophets and Apostles. Therefore, like the Christian religion itself, all the preaching of the Church must be nourished and regulated by Sacred Scripture. For in the sacred books, the Father who is in heaven meets His children with great love and speaks with them; and the force and power in the word of God is so great that it stands as the support and energy of the Church, the strength of faith for her sons, the food of the soul, the pure and everlasting source of spiritual life. Consequently these words are perfectly applicable to Sacred Scripture: "For the word of God is living and active" (Heb. 4:12) and "it has power to build you up and give you your heritage among all those who are sanctified" (Acts 20:32; see 1 Thess. 2:13).​

67 Th 2:13; cf. DV 24.

24. Sacred theology rests on the written word of God, together with sacred tradition, as its primary and perpetual foundation. By scrutinizing in the light of faith all truth stored up in the mystery of Christ, theology is most powerfully strengthened and constantly rejuvenated by that word. For the Sacred Scriptures contain the word of God and since they are inspired, really are the word of God; and so the study of the sacred page is, as it were, the soul of sacred theology. (3) By the same word of Scripture the ministry of the word also, that is, pastoral preaching, catechetics and all Christian instruction, in which the liturgical homily must hold the foremost place, is nourished in a healthy way and flourishes in a holy way.​

68 DV 21.
If one can accomplish all this digging in the Bible for oneself by themselves, without the Church, good for them. I say it can't be done.

 

[Raccoon1010]

Read the letters Jesus wrote to the Catholic/Orthodox church age - Thyatira at the end of Revelation 2 (Jezebel is the old name representing the pagan religion of the goddess and child that the original Jezebel was a high priestess in) This is why you can't find any references of the assumption of Mary or any other holy traditions regarding Jesus' mother in the New Testament. The Church just took the present goddess and child, Venus and Cupid and renamed them Mary and Jesus. This was done two emperors after Constantine when paganism was outlawed, and they needed a way to initiate all these pagans into the Churches. Many other pagan trappings were also brought into the Church. So NEVER pray to Mary, or any other dead human. Only Jesus is the true Mediator between the Father and us. Yes, Mary bore Him, but she never shed an ounce of blood for you to be venerated like she has been. Jesus hates that practice; otherwise He would not have called this goddess Jezebel.

...and the letter to the Protestant Reformation era - Sardis at the beginning of Revelation 3. You will see that there were some very unholy doctrines first brought into this age that Jesus calls "dead." But notice that 200 years (known church history) after the start of this age holiness was also reinstated from the 1st century. So pick wisely.

Well I don't equate Mary to Jezebel. And I think God honors Mary. But no I don't pray to Mary. Thanks for the input.

 

[Illuminator]

Read the letters Jesus wrote to the Catholic/Orthodox church age - Thyatira at the end of Revelation 2 (Jezebel is the old name representing the pagan religion of the goddess and child that the original Jezebel was a high priestess in) This is why you can't find any references of the assumption of Mary or any other holy traditions regarding Jesus' mother in the New Testament.

You are forced to ignore what has always been believed about a woman giving birth to a man child. Oh, it's Isreal! Oh, it's the Church! Yes, but anything but the obvious.

The Church just took the present goddess and child, Venus and Cupid and renamed them Mary and Jesus.

I challenge you to find any qualified historian that agrees with this lunacy.

Opponents of the Church often attempt to discredit Catholicism by attempting to show similarities between it and the beliefs or practices of ancient paganism. This fallacy is frequently committed by Fundamentalists against Catholics; by Seventh-day Adventists, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Mormons, and others against both Protestants and Catholics; and by atheists and skeptics against both Christians and Jews.​

Is Catholicism Pagan?

​

This was done two emperors after Constantine when paganism was outlawed, and they needed a way to initiate all these pagans into the Churches. Many other pagan trappings were also brought into the Church.

Here is another link that you will ignore, but many won't.
Anti-Catholic Myths and Lies: #1 Emperor Constantine Founded the Catholic Church | David L. Gray

So NEVER pray to Mary, or any other dead human.

So everyone who has died and in heaven is dead? Interesting...

Catholics are not obligated to ask Mary to intercede. A devotion is not a doctrine.

Only Jesus is the true Mediator between the Father and us.

As always taught by the CC. But ruling out subordinate mediators is a man made tradition you have dogmatized. The Bible doesn't do that.
II. God Desires and Responds to Our Subordinate Mediation / Intercessory Prayer

Yes, Mary bore Him, but she never shed an ounce of blood for you to be venerated like she has been.

So to you, Luke 2:33-35 is meaningless filler.

Jesus hates that practice; otherwise He would not have called this goddess Jezebel.

Jesus loved and honored His mother. Aren't we called to be like Jesus as best as we can? Anything but that???

...and the letter to the Protestant Reformation era - Sardis at the beginning of Revelation 3. You will see that there were some very unholy doctrines first brought into this age that Jesus calls "dead." But notice that 200 years (known church history) after the start of this age holiness was also reinstated from the 1st century. So pick wisely.

People want the truth, not your false history that's similar to SDA hate.

I like Revelation too, but I don't think Jesus would want anyone to fashion weapons from it, as you do.

The Book of Revelation shows us glimpses of the heavenly liturgy – Jesus Christ’s once and for all sacrifice eternally present in heaven. This is why the Church has always incorporated the elements that John saw in the heavenly liturgy into her earthly liturgy, for they are one and the same liturgical action of Jesus Christ our High Priest. Focusing on sin and evil in the Book of Revelation is a spiritual sickness.

Rev. 1:6, 20:6 – heaven’s identification of the priesthood of the faithful is the same as the Church’s identification on earth.

Rev. 1:10 – John witnesses the heavenly liturgy on Sunday, the Lord’s day, which is a Catholic holy day of obligation for attending Mass on earth.

Rev. 1:12, 2:5 – there are lampstands or Menorahs in heaven. These have always been used in the Holy Mass of the Church on earth.

Rev. 1:13 – Jesus is clothed as High Priest. Our priests also clothe themselves as “alter Christuses” (other Christs) in offering His sacrifice in the Holy Mass on earth.

Rev. 1:13, 4:4, 6:11, 7:9, 15:6, 19:13-14 – priests wear special vestments in heaven. Our priests also wear special vestments in celebrating the Holy Mass on earth.

Rev. 2:5,16,21; 3:3; 16:11 – there is a penitential rite in heaven which is also part of the liturgy of the Holy Mass on earth.

Rev. 2:17 – there is manna in heaven given to the faithful. This is the same as the Eucharistic manna given to the faithful at the Holy Mass on earth.

Rev. 4:4, 5:14; 11:16, 14:3, 19:4 – there are priests (“presbyteroi”) in heaven. Priests offer sacrifice. Our earthly priests participate with the heavenly priests in offering Jesus’ eternal sacrifice in the Holy Mass on earth.

Rev. 4:8 – heaven’s liturgical chant “Holy, Holy, Holy” is the same that is used in the liturgy of the Holy Mass on earth.

Rev. 4:8-11, 5:9-14, 7:10-12, 18:1-8 – the various antiphonal chants in the heavenly liturgy are similar to those used at the Holy Mass on earth.

Rev. 5:1 – there is a book or scroll of God’s word in heaven. This is reflected in the Liturgy of the Word at the Holy Mass on earth.

Rev. 5:6 and throughout – heaven’s description of Jesus as the “Lamb” is the same as the description of Jesus as the Lamb of God in the Eucharistic liturgy of the Holy Mass on earth.

Rev. 5:8, 6:9-11, 8:3-4 – heaven’s emphasis on the intercession of the saints is the same as the Holy Mass on earth.

Rev. 5:8, 8:3-4 – there is incense in heaven which has always been part of the liturgy of the Holy Mass on earth.

Rev. 5:14; 7:12; 19:4 – heaven’s concluding liturgical prayer “Amen” is the same as is used at the Holy Mass on earth.

Rev. 6:9 – the martyrs who are seen under the heavenly altar is similar to the Church’s tradition of keeping relics of saints under the earthly altars.

Rev. 7:3, 14:1, 22:4 – there is the sign of the cross (“tau”) in heaven. This sign is used during the Holy Mass on earth.

Rev. 7:9; 14:6 – the catholicity or universality of heaven as God’s family is the essence of the Catholic faith on earth.

Rev. 8:1 – the silent contemplation in heaven is similar to our silent contemplation at the Holy Mass on earth.

Rev. 8:3, 11:1, 14:18, 16:7 – there is an altar in heaven. But no altar is needed unless a sacrifice is being offered in heaven. This is the same sacrifice that is offered on the altars used in the Holy Masses on earth.

Rev. 11:12 – the phrase “come up here” is similar to the priest’s charge to “lift up your hearts” at the Holy Mass on earth.

Rev. 12:1-6, 13-17 – heaven’s emphasis on the Blessed Virgin Mary is the same as the Holy Mass on earth.

Rev. 12:7 – heaven’s emphasis on the Archangel Michael’s intercession is the same as the concluding prayers at the Holy Mass on earth.

Rev. 14:4 – there are consecrated celibates in heaven, as there are with our Catholic priests and religious on earth.

Rev. 15:7, 16:1-4,8,10,12,17; 21:9 – there are chalices (or bowls) in the heavenly liturgy. This is like the chalices used to offer Christ’s sacrifice in the Holy Mass on earth.

Rev. 15:3-4 – there is the recitation of the “Gloria” in heaven. This is also recited at the Holy Mass on earth.

Rev. 15:5 – there is a tent or tabernacle in heaven. Tabernacles are used to store the Eucharist at the Holy Mass on earth.

Rev. 17, 19:9 – the consummation of the Lamb at heaven’s marriage supper is the same as the Lamb’s supper in the Holy Mass on earth.

Rev. 19:1,3,4,6 – there is the recitation of the “Alleluia” in heaven. This is also recited at the Holy Mass on earth.
THE EUCHARIST - Scripture Catholic

 

[ScottA]

That's my point.
The truth of Matt. 16:18, when read in CONTEXT with the rest of the NT is NOT as convoluted and mysterious as you have laid it out.

It's a LOT more simple to understand when you cross reference it with the OT TYPE that prefigured it:
Isaiah 22:20-22
“In that day I will summon my servant, Eliakim son of Hilkiah. I will clothe him with your robe and fasten your sash around him and hand your authority over to him. He will be a father to those who live in Jerusalem and to the people of Judah. I will place on his shoulder the key to the house of David; what he opens no one can shut, and what he shuts no one can open.

Matt. 16:18-19
And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”

As I said, you speak of, and your choice, is that of flesh and blood. You speak of worldly things, but I speak of heavenly things.

But let me give you something more of the mystery which you seem to prefer to avoid:

The parallel that you have pointed out above points rather to two kings. Both are sons of David. One is king of the greatest kingdom of this world, and the other's kingdom is not of this world: Solomon and Jesus. The parallel which you have attributed to Peter points rather to Solomon who is only another parable.​

 

[Windmill Charge]

I created a thread to discuss what sin is. And I found that my understanding of sin was vague. But now I have a clear understanding. With that I have grown beyond some churches. I watch Catholic mass online and sometimes attend the parish down the road. But they don't have married clergy so I find them not following biblical teachings.

That lead me to the protestants. But I'm wondering how they differ from the Catholics. I'm somewhat familiar with the Catholic denomination and don't accept all of it. Would I fit better in a protestant denomination?

May I suggest that you check out the statements of faith in your local churches, that you try emailing the minister with any querries you have about them and either watch there on line srvices or walk in on sunday.

A church is not a building or an organisation, but a community of people.

 

[BreadOfLife]

As I said, you speak of, and your choice, is that of flesh and blood. You speak of worldly things, but I speak of heavenly things.

But let me give you something more of the mystery which you seem to prefer to avoid:

The parallel that you have pointed out above points rather to two kings. Both are sons of David. One is king of the greatest kingdom of this world, and the other's kingdom is not of this world: Solomon and Jesus. The parallel which you have attributed to Peter points rather to Solomon who is only another parable.​

NOT sure how you can say this when I DID, in fact, point to the spiritual with regard to Matt. 16:18-19.

I showed that Jesus calls Simon,
“Kepha”, which means “Rock”.

I also showed the connection to the Heavenly Jerusalem in Rev. 21 is built on 12 ROCKS (foundations) with the name of one of the
Apostles on each foundation.

I then posited that since Peter was obviously in charge, per the Scriptural examples I gave – HIS name is probably on the FIRST foundation.

It doesn’t get ANY more spiritual than this . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

Don't be emotional. Tell me, how many of those FBI and insurance claims pertained to bonafine Protestant ministers, and how many to wolves in sheep's clothing? You'll find that the numbers pale in comparison to that of the priests.

What an ASININE response.

I would posit that ANY minister – Protestant OR Catholic that preys on children is a wolf in
sheep’s clothing.
YOU are trying to say that only charlatans and Catholics can be perverts – but NOT well-educated, ordained mainline Protestant ministers.
YOU are a fraud and a liar.

Consider yourself factually and statistically SPANKED . . .

 

[ScottA]

NOT sure how you can say this when I DID, in fact, point to the spiritual with regard to Matt. 16:18-19.

I showed that Jesus calls Simon,
“Kepha”, which means “Rock”.

I also showed the connection to the Heavenly Jerusalem in Rev. 21 is built on 12 ROCKS (foundations) with the name of one of the
Apostles on each foundation.

I then posited that since Peter was obviously in charge, per the Scriptural examples I gave – HIS name is probably on the FIRST foundation.

It doesn’t get ANY more spiritual than this . . .

Being "spiritual" is not the issue. The issue is rather, that all of what you have presented pertains to Peter rather than the Father--which are the two components to the choice that Jesus set before the early church...the one flesh and blood, and the other not. That is the simplicity, rather than searching the scriptures of ways to support either choice (I only did so initially, to level the field, that you might give it consideration).

The point is flesh and blood ends in death...and that is what Jesus set before the early church by including Peter in what He did not need to include him in, that they should choose.

But if you continue to defend what was also foretold to be greatly false, it is not unlike Israel defending the law...and we know how that ended.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Being "spiritual" is not the issue. The issue is rather, that all of what you have presented pertains to Peter rather than the Father--which are the two components to the choice that Jesus set before the early church...the one flesh and blood, and the other not. That is the simplicity, rather than searching the scriptures of ways to support either choice (I only did so initially, to level the field, that you might give it consideration).

The point is flesh and blood ends in death...and that is what Jesus set before the early church by including Peter in what He did not need to include him in, that they should choose.

But if you continue to defend what was also foretold to be greatly false, it is not unlike Israel defending the law...and we know how that ended.

No – it ALL points to CHRIST.

Everything Jesus told Peter in Matt 16 points to JESUS.
Everything God promised Eliakim in Isa. 22 points to JESUS.
The Heavenly Jerusalem in Rev. 21 represents the CHURCH – which is the Brid of Christ.

OT Type and NT fulfillment is ALL about Him – even the types about others like Peter and Mary.
Jesus explained to the 2 men on the Road to Emmaus how this all pointed to Him. Early Church Fathers, like Augustine, in their wisdom wrote:
“The New Testament lies hidden in the Old Testament – and the Old is revealed in the New.”

It ALL points to Christ.

 

[BreadOfLife]

For the record, @ScottA, I know we've had some heated discussions in the past - but I am enjoying this more civil exchange . . .