OFFICE OF POPE IN THE BIBLE

[epostle1]

Isaiah 22: 19-25

Isa. 22: 19
Shebna is described as having an "office" and a "station." An office, in order for it to be an office, has successors. In order for an earthly kingdom to last, a succession of representatives is required.

This was the case in the Old Covenant kingdom, and it is the case in the New Covenant kingdom which fulfills the Old Covenant. Jesus our King is in heaven, but He has appointed a chief steward over His household with a plan for a succession of representatives.

Isa. 22:20

In the old Davidic kingdom, Eliakim succeeds Shebna as the chief steward of the household of God. The kingdom employs a mechanism of dynastic succession. King David was dead for centuries, but his kingdom is preserved through a succession of representatives.

Isa. 22:21

Eliakim is called “father” or “papa” of God's people. The word Pope used by Catholics to describe the chief steward of the earthly kingdom simply means papa or father in Italian. This is why Catholics call the leader of the Church "Pope." The Pope is the father of God's people, the chief steward of the earthly kingdom and Christ's representative on earth.

Isa. 22:22

We see that the keys of the kingdom pass from Shebna to Eliakim. Thus, the keys are used not only as a symbol of authority, but also to facilitate succession. The keys of Christ's kingdom have passed from Peter to Linus all the way to our current Pope with an unbroken lineage for almost 2,000 years.

Rev. 1:18; Rev. 3:7 ; Rev. 9:1 ; Rev. 20:1

Jesus' "keys" undeniably represent authority. By using the word "keys," Jesus gives Peter authority on earth over the new Davidic kingdom, and this was not seriously questioned by anyone until the Protestant revolt 1,500 years later after Peter’s investiture.

Revelation 3:7 "And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia write: `The words of the holy one, the true one, who has the key of David, who opens and no one shall shut, who shuts and no one opens. Almost the same wording is used in Matthew 16:19

Matt. 16:190

Whatever Peter binds or looses on earth is bound or loosed in heaven / when the Prime Minister to the King opens, no one shuts. This "binding and loosing" authority, a rabbinical term, allows the keeper of the keys to establish "halakah," or rules of conduct for the members of the kingdom he serves.

Jer. 33:17

Jeremiah prophesies that David shall never lack a man to sit on the throne of the earthly House of Israel. Either this is a false prophecy, or David has a successor of representatives throughout history.

Dan. 2:44

Daniel prophesies an earthly kingdom that will never be destroyed. Either this is a false prophecy, or the earthly kingdom requires succession.

 

[epostle1]

Pope means "father". The title of "Pope" was granted to any bishop for almost 3 centuries. Confronting the worn out canard of "call no man father":
Matt. 23:9 – Jesus says, “call no man father.” But Protestants use this verse in an attempt to prove that it is wrong for Catholics to call priests “father.” This is an example of “eisegesis” (imposing one’s views upon a passage) as opposed to “exegesis” (drawing out the meaning of the passage from its context). In this verse, Jesus was discouraging His followers from elevating the scribes and Pharisees to the titles of “fathers” and “rabbis” because they were hypocrites. Jesus warns us not to elevate anyone to the level of our heavenly Father.

Matt. 23:8 – in this teaching, Jesus also says not to call anyone teacher or rabbi as well. But don’t Protestants call their teachers “teacher?” What about this commandment of Jesus? When Protestants say “call no man father,” they must also argue that we cannot call any man teacher either.

Judges 17:10; 18:19 – priesthood and fatherhood have always been identified together. Fatherhood literally means “communicating one’s nature,” and just as biological fathers communicate their nature to their children, so do spiritual fathers communicate the nature of God to us, their children, through (hopefully) teaching and example.

Eph. 3:14-15 – every family in heaven and on earth is named from the “Father.” We are fathers in the Father.

Acts 7:2; 22:1,1 John 2:13 – elders of the Church are called “fathers.” Therefore, we should ask the question, “Why don’t Protestants call their pastors “father?”

1 Cor. 4:15 – Paul writes, “I became your father in Christ Jesus.” Is Paul wrong???

1 Cor. 4:17 – Paul calls Bishop Timothy a beloved and faithful “child” in the Lord.

2 Cor. 12:14 – Paul describes his role as parent over his “children” the Corinthians.

Phil. 2:22 – Paul calls Timothy’s service to him as a son serves a “father.”

1 Thess. 2:11- Paul compares the Church elders’ ministry to the people like a father with his children.

1 Tim. 1:2,18; 2 Tim. 1:2-3 – Paul calls Timothy his true “child” in the faith and his son.

Titus 1:4 – Paul calls Titus his true “child” in a common faith. Priests are our spiritual fathers in the family of God.

Philemon 10 – Paul says he has become the “father” of Onesimus.

Heb. 12:7,9 – emphasizes our earthly “fathers.” But these are not just biological but also spiritual (the priests of the Church).

1 Peter 5:13 – Peter refers to himself as father by calling Mark his “son.”

1 John 2:1,13,14 – John calls the elders of the Church “fathers.”

1 John 2:1,18,28; 3:18; 5:21; 3 John 4 – John calls members of the Church “children.”

 

[Truth7t7]

Pope means "father". The title of "Pope" was granted to any bishop for almost 3 centuries. Confronting the worn out canard of "call no man father":
Matt. 23:9 – Jesus says, “call no man father.” But Protestants use this verse in an attempt to prove that it is wrong for Catholics to call priests “father.” This is an example of “eisegesis” (imposing one’s views upon a passage) as opposed to “exegesis” (drawing out the meaning of the passage from its context). In this verse, Jesus was discouraging His followers from elevating the scribes and Pharisees to the titles of “fathers” and “rabbis” because they were hypocrites. Jesus warns us not to elevate anyone to the level of our heavenly Father.

Matt. 23:8 – in this teaching, Jesus also says not to call anyone teacher or rabbi as well. But don’t Protestants call their teachers “teacher?” What about this commandment of Jesus? When Protestants say “call no man father,” they must also argue that we cannot call any man teacher either.

Judges 17:10; 18:19 – priesthood and fatherhood have always been identified together. Fatherhood literally means “communicating one’s nature,” and just as biological fathers communicate their nature to their children, so do spiritual fathers communicate the nature of God to us, their children, through (hopefully) teaching and example.

Eph. 3:14-15 – every family in heaven and on earth is named from the “Father.” We are fathers in the Father.

Acts 7:2; 22:1,1 John 2:13 – elders of the Church are called “fathers.” Therefore, we should ask the question, “Why don’t Protestants call their pastors “father?”

1 Cor. 4:15 – Paul writes, “I became your father in Christ Jesus.” Is Paul wrong???

1 Cor. 4:17 – Paul calls Bishop Timothy a beloved and faithful “child” in the Lord.

2 Cor. 12:14 – Paul describes his role as parent over his “children” the Corinthians.

Phil. 2:22 – Paul calls Timothy’s service to him as a son serves a “father.”

1 Thess. 2:11- Paul compares the Church elders’ ministry to the people like a father with his children.

1 Tim. 1:2,18; 2 Tim. 1:2-3 – Paul calls Timothy his true “child” in the faith and his son.

Titus 1:4 – Paul calls Titus his true “child” in a common faith. Priests are our spiritual fathers in the family of God.

Philemon 10 – Paul says he has become the “father” of Onesimus.

Heb. 12:7,9 – emphasizes our earthly “fathers.” But these are not just biological but also spiritual (the priests of the Church).

1 Peter 5:13 – Peter refers to himself as father by calling Mark his “son.”

1 John 2:1,13,14 – John calls the elders of the Church “fathers.”

1 John 2:1,18,28; 3:18; 5:21; 3 John 4 – John calls members of the Church “children.”

One thing I do know, the Pope is not the Vicar Of Christ on this earth, and he is not the leader of God's church on earth.

My view of scripture has Roman Catholicism on the outside looking in.

 

[epostle1]

The basic assumptions the typical Evangelical has about the papacy are part of the wallpaper in the Evangelical world. Being brought up in an independent Bible Church, I was taught that our little fellowship of Christians meeting to study the Bible, pray and sing gospel songs was like the ‘early Christians’ meeting in their house churches.

I had a mental picture of ‘Catholic Pope’ which I had pieced together from a whole range of biased sources. When I heard the word ‘pope’ I pictured a corpulent Italian with the juicy name “Borgia” who drank a lot of wine, was supposed to be celibate, but who not only had mistresses, but sons who he called ‘nephews’. This ‘pope’ had big banquets in one of his many palaces, was very rich, rode out to war when he felt like it and liked to tell Michelangelo how to paint. That this ‘pope’ was a later invention of the corrupt Catholic Church was simply part of the whole colorful story.

But of course, the idea that the florid Renaissance pope is typical of all popes is not a Catholic invention, but a Protestant one. Protestantism has been compelled to rewrite all history according to it’s own necessities. As French historian Augustin Thierry has written, “To live, Protestantism found itself forced to build up a history of its own.”

The five basic assumptions of non-Catholic Christians can be corrected by looking at the history of the early church.

1. Did Jesus envision and plan a monarchical papacy?
2. Was the early church de-centralized?
3. Was the early church essentially local and congregational?
4. Did the early church only become hierarchical after the emperor was converted?
5. Did Leo the Great invent the papacy in the fifth century?

To examine this we’ll have to put on one side the preconceptions and mental images of Borgia popes and get down to ‘just the facts ma’am.’

Authority of the First Popes - Fr. Dwight Longenecker

 

[Helen]

Oh come on...lets sing one more round of -" For he's a jolly good fellow..."

 

[epostle1]

One thing I do know, the Pope is not the Vicar Of Christ on this earth, and he is not the leader of God's church on earth.

Please define "vicar". Use a dictionary and not your biased opinion.
So you deny all the scriptures in the OP?

 

[epostle1]

Oh come on...lets sing one more round of -" For he's a jolly good fellow..."

The first 40 jolly good fellows were killed by pagan Romans, but that fact spoils the agenda of anti-Catholics.

 

[Truth7t7]

The basic assumptions the typical Evangelical has about the papacy are part of the wallpaper in the Evangelical world. Being brought up in an independent Bible Church, I was taught that our little fellowship of Christians meeting to study the Bible, pray and sing gospel songs was like the ‘early Christians’ meeting in their house churches.

I had a mental picture of ‘Catholic Pope’ which I had pieced together from a whole range of biased sources. When I heard the word ‘pope’ I pictured a corpulent Italian with the juicy name “Borgia” who drank a lot of wine, was supposed to be celibate, but who not only had mistresses, but sons who he called ‘nephews’. This ‘pope’ had big banquets in one of his many palaces, was very rich, rode out to war when he felt like it and liked to tell Michelangelo how to paint. That this ‘pope’ was a later invention of the corrupt Catholic Church was simply part of the whole colorful story.

But of course, the idea that the florid Renaissance pope is typical of all popes is not a Catholic invention, but a Protestant one. Protestantism has been compelled to rewrite all history according to it’s own necessities. As French historian Augustin Thierry has written, “To live, Protestantism found itself forced to build up a history of its own.”

The five basic assumptions of non-Catholic Christians can be corrected by looking at the history of the early church.

1. Did Jesus envision and plan a monarchical papacy?
2. Was the early church de-centralized?
3. Was the early church essentially local and congregational?
4. Did the early church only become hierarchical after the emperor was converted?
5. Did Leo the Great invent the papacy in the fifth century?

To examine this we’ll have to put on one side the preconceptions and mental images of Borgia popes and get down to ‘just the facts ma’am.’

Authority of the First Popes - Fr. Dwight Longenecker

Was the early church decentralized?

The church never found it's foundation in Constatines St. Peters Basilica, and the Papal seat that he created in 325AD

Wikipedia: Old Saint Peters Basilica

Old St. Peter's Basilica was the 4th-century church begun by the Emperor Constantine the Great between 319 and 333 AD.

You gonna deny that Constatine built St. Peters Basilica, and gave civil support to this established seat? Smiles

Constatine invited 1800 bishops to the council of Nicea 325AD all expenses paid, only 300 showed up, that sends a strong message to Rome being the central hierarchy of the Christian church.

The Roman Emperor wasn't in control, nor his puppet State Church established in Rome, at St Peters Basilica.

 

[Helen]

The first 40 jolly good fellows were killed by pagan Romans, but that fact spoils the agenda of anti-Catholics.

Do all of you who love arguing these points ..( meaning the Caths and the Prots) lay in bed at night gearing up for the next battle.
It seems that you guys, on both sides of the argument, live for these "battles". Where would this site be with no ongoing threads which never solve anything, but go in circles.
When the Site is quiet, I'm as guilty because I stop and take time to read some of them.
I greatly admire BOL and have told him so...he has great tenacity ..often fighting two or three at a time....he has it down to a fine art.

Well, it gives you all something to do...but sometimes it is very repetitive.

Blessings....Helen

 

[Helen]

@epostle 1 ...What happened to your original username and avatar ?

 

[epostle1]

Was the early church decentralized?

The church never found it's foundation in Constatines St. Peters Basilica, and the Papal seat that he created in 325AD

I've already demolished your Constantine myths and I am not talking about 325 AD. I am talking about the 1st century. Post #1 severely damages your man made pope bashing position. You have been running from the scriptures in the OP and that is why you keep trying to change the topic. You are a religious coward.

You gonna deny that Constatine built St. Peters Basilica, and gave civil support to this established seat? Smiles

Whatever support Constantine gave the Church does not change the doctrine of the papacy that was initiated by Christ himself. You deny He did and you refuse to understand development.

Constatine invited 1800 bishops to the council of Nicea 325AD all expenses paid, only 300 showed up, that sends a strong message to Rome being the central hierarchy of the Christian church.

You send me a strong message that you haven't a clue what you are talking about. You haven't learned from the last 3 times you posted this nonsense. There were not 1800 bishops in the entire world at that time. You offer no references, as usual.

The Roman Emperor wasn't in control, nor his puppet State Church established in Rome, at St Peters Basilica.

The pope "controlled" the Church, the only term you understand, Trump "controls" the USA, the Emperor "controlled" the state. "puppet state church" is the language of ignorant anti-Catholic bigots who like to deceive uneducated people with false histories.
Until you can verify your false history with scholarly documentation, you are just another angry anti-Catholic liar.

 

[brakelite]

Funny. @epostle1 demands sources and proof, and blocks those who offer it so he doesn't have to read or acknowledge it. Or simply ignores it.

 

[epostle1]

@epostle 1 ...What happened to your original username and avatar ?

It was kepha31. I had to put in a password for some unknown reason, and it was not accepted no matter what I did. I had to start over.

 

[Truth7t7]

I've already demolished your Constantine myths and I am not talking about 325 AD. I am talking about the 1st century. Post #1 severely damages your man made pope bashing position. You have been running from the scriptures in the OP and that is why you keep trying to change the topic. You are a religious coward.

Whatever support Constantine gave the Church does not change the doctrine of the papacy that was initiated by Christ himself. You deny He did and you refuse to understand development.

You send me a strong message that you haven't a clue what you are talking about. You haven't learned from the last 3 times you posted this nonsense. There were not 1800 bishops in the entire world at that time. You offer no references, as usual.

The pope "controlled" the Church, the only term you understand, Trump "controls" the USA, the Emperor "controlled" the state. "puppet state church" is the language of ignorant anti-Catholic bigots who like to deceive uneducated people with false histories.
Until you can verify your false history with scholarly documentation, you are just another angry anti-Catholic liar.

Constatine built St. Peters Basilica, And Established The New Church State Known As Roman Catholicism In 322-325AD.

1800 Bishops Were Invited To Constantine's Council Of Nicea 325AD, All Expenses Paid, Only 300 Showed Up, The Papal Seat In St. Peters Basilica Had No Control Of Christianity, And Still Doesn't

Roman Catholicism Is Filled With Heretical Teachings, I'll List A Few.

Carm

A list of false teachings in the Roman Catholic Church

Following is a summarized paragraph with references found in the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) of many of the false teachings of Roman Catholicism. How do we know they are false? By comparing Scripture with what is taught.

-----------------------

1.)The Catholic Church is the one true church (CCC 2105)
2.) Infallibility of the Catholic Church, (CCC 2035)
3.) Only the Roman Catholic Church has authority to interpret Scripture (CCC 100)
4.)The Pope is the head of the church and has the authority of Christ (CCC 2034)
5.)The Roman Catholic Church is necessary for salvation (CCC 846)
6.)Sacred Tradition equal to scripture (CCC 82)
7.)Forgiveness of sins, salvation, is by faith and works (CCC 2036 CCC 2080 2068)
8.)Full benefit of Salvation is only through the Roman Catholic Church (Vatican 2, Decree on Ecumenism, 3)
9.)Grace can be merited (CCC 2010 CCC 2027)
10.)The merit of Mary and the Saints can be applied to Catholics and others (1477) 11.)Penance is necessary for salvation (CCC 980)
12.)Purgatory (CCC 1031 CCC 1475)
13.)Indulgences (CCC 1471 CCC 1478 CCC 1498 CCC 1472)
15.)Mary is Mediatrix (CCC 969)
16.) Mary brings us the gifts of eternal salvation (CCC 969)
17.)Mary delivers souls from death (CCC 966)
18.)Prayer to the saints (CCC 2677)
19.)The Communion elements become the actual body and blood of Christ (CCC 1374 CCC 1376).

 

[epostle1]

Constatine built St. Peters Basilica, And Established The New Church State Known As Roman Catholicism In 322-325AD.

The Church shifted from being persecuted to being protected. That's why church buildings were unheard of in the first 3 centuries, but it requires at least 2 functioning brain cells to figure that out. You haven't got a shred of evidence of a Church State. Try a reference from a real historian, if you know what a real historian is. Jackkk Chickkk and Dave Hunt are not historians.

1800 Bishops Were Invited To Constantine's Council Of Nicea 325AD, All Expenses Paid, Only 300 Showed Up, The Papal Seat In St. Peters Basilica Had No Control Of Christianity, And Still Doesn't

This is about the 4th time you posted this 1800 bishops nonsense.

Roman Catholicism Is Filled With Heretical Teachings, I'll List A Few.

Carm

A list of false teachings in the Roman Catholic Church

Following is a summarized paragraph with references found in the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) of many of the false teachings of Roman Catholicism. How do we know they are false? By comparing Scripture with what is taught.

-----------------------

1.)The Catholic Church is the one true church (CCC 2105)
2.) Infallibility of the Catholic Church, (CCC 2035)
3.) Only the Roman Catholic Church has authority to interpret Scripture (CCC 100)
4.)The Pope is the head of the church and has the authority of Christ (CCC 2034)
5.)The Roman Catholic Church is necessary for salvation (CCC 846)
6.)Sacred Tradition equal to scripture (CCC 82)
7.)Forgiveness of sins, salvation, is by faith and works (CCC 2036 CCC 2080 2068)
8.)Full benefit of Salvation is only through the Roman Catholic Church (Vatican 2, Decree on Ecumenism, 3)
9.)Grace can be merited (CCC 2010 CCC 2027)
10.)The merit of Mary and the Saints can be applied to Catholics and others (1477) 11.)Penance is necessary for salvation (CCC 980)
12.)Purgatory (CCC 1031 CCC 1475)
13.)Indulgences (CCC 1471 CCC 1478 CCC 1498 CCC 1472)
15.)Mary is Mediatrix (CCC 969)
16.) Mary brings us the gifts of eternal salvation (CCC 969)
17.)Mary delivers souls from death (CCC 966)
18.)Prayer to the saints (CCC 2677)
19.)The Communion elements become the actual body and blood of Christ (CCC 1374 CCC 1376).

You can re-post, re-post and re-post the same misrepresentations and abuses of the catechism (that lacks any context). You will not sway anyone seeking the truth of what the Church teaches. You are not seeking anything except bashing a non-existent Boogie Man. Grow up.
I explained to Matt Slick a few years ago the proper way to use the catechism. He deleted my post.

 

[brakelite]

You are a religious coward.

And blocking those whose answers you don't like is.....

 

[Taken]

We have TWO who ARE CALLED BY NAME, WHO ARE the Father of earthly nations.

1) Abraham the Faithful of the Old Covenant.
Gen 17: 4 -5

2) Christ the Lord Jesus of the New Covenant.
Rom 4:18

3) Christ Jesus, the Seed.
Luke 8:11
Gal 3:16

4) Jesus' Church built without hands of men,
But rather being built on Belief IN CHIRST, as Jesus revealed that the understanding Jesus IS the Christ, was first reveal to Simon Barjona, via the Heavenly Father.
Mark 14:58


5) Christ is the Rock of Gods People, who are called by the name "ISRAEL", the Chief Corner Stone, the Head of His Church.
2 Sam 23:3
2 Sam 7:11
1 Peter 2:6

Our Fathers ON EARTH....The Lord Himself revealed....

Abraham
Chirst Jesus

 

[ScottA]

Isaiah 22: 19-25

Isa. 22: 19
Shebna is described as having an "office" and a "station." An office, in order for it to be an office, has successors. In order for an earthly kingdom to last, a succession of representatives is required.

This was the case in the Old Covenant kingdom, and it is the case in the New Covenant kingdom which fulfills the Old Covenant. Jesus our King is in heaven, but He has appointed a chief steward over His household with a plan for a succession of representatives.

Isa. 22:20

In the old Davidic kingdom, Eliakim succeeds Shebna as the chief steward of the household of God. The kingdom employs a mechanism of dynastic succession. King David was dead for centuries, but his kingdom is preserved through a succession of representatives.

Isa. 22:21

Eliakim is called “father” or “papa” of God's people. The word Pope used by Catholics to describe the chief steward of the earthly kingdom simply means papa or father in Italian. This is why Catholics call the leader of the Church "Pope." The Pope is the father of God's people, the chief steward of the earthly kingdom and Christ's representative on earth.

Isa. 22:22

We see that the keys of the kingdom pass from Shebna to Eliakim. Thus, the keys are used not only as a symbol of authority, but also to facilitate succession. The keys of Christ's kingdom have passed from Peter to Linus all the way to our current Pope with an unbroken lineage for almost 2,000 years.

Rev. 1:18; Rev. 3:7 ; Rev. 9:1 ; Rev. 20:1

Jesus' "keys" undeniably represent authority. By using the word "keys," Jesus gives Peter authority on earth over the new Davidic kingdom, and this was not seriously questioned by anyone until the Protestant revolt 1,500 years later after Peter’s investiture.

Revelation 3:7 "And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia write: `The words of the holy one, the true one, who has the key of David, who opens and no one shall shut, who shuts and no one opens. Almost the same wording is used in Matthew 16:19

Matt. 16:190

Whatever Peter binds or looses on earth is bound or loosed in heaven / when the Prime Minister to the King opens, no one shuts. This "binding and loosing" authority, a rabbinical term, allows the keeper of the keys to establish "halakah," or rules of conduct for the members of the kingdom he serves.

Jer. 33:17

Jeremiah prophesies that David shall never lack a man to sit on the throne of the earthly House of Israel. Either this is a false prophecy, or David has a successor of representatives throughout history.

Dan. 2:44

Daniel prophesies an earthly kingdom that will never be destroyed. Either this is a false prophecy, or the earthly kingdom requires succession.

You have sited passages pertaining to Israel, of whom Christ was the Last. Since then, these are the times of the gentiles, that "other fold" which He said He must also bring. Therefore those passages do not rightfully apply. You assume too much. We now have a new High Priest, Jesus Christ...and there is no other that is not an impostor.

As for Matthew 16, it was the process by which Peter received the knowledge of who Jesus was from the Father, that was the example of how Jesus would build His church - not Peter himself. If you will properly define the words for Peter and Rock, you will see they are different. The correct Rock is God, the Rock of ages. But men who look to men rather than God, do not see the things of the Spirit.

 

[epostle1]

You have sited passages pertaining to Israel, of whom Christ was the Last. Since then, these are the times of the gentiles, that "other fold" which He said He must also bring. Therefore those passages do not rightfully apply. You assume too much. We now have a new High Priest, Jesus Christ...and there is no other that is not an impostor.

Typology is the study of foreshadow, so you can't read Isaiah 22 as a proof text. That is not how I presented it. It is prophetic, but not a prophecy per se. You have no criteria to determine what parts of the OT apply only to Israel and what parts apply to the Church. You don't have enough faith to believe that Jesus, the High Priest, has the authority to appoint an earthly steward. An invisible church cannot bind and loose anything. You haven't addressed the issue of "keys" either.

As for Matthew 16, it was the process by which Peter received the knowledge of who Jesus was from the Father, that was the example of how Jesus would build His church - not Peter himself. If you will properly define the words for Peter and Rock, you will see they are different. The correct Rock is God, the Rock of ages. But men who look to men rather than God, do not see the things of the Spirit.

God is also called rock, that is a Catholic teaching you borrowed from us.

I would rather look to "men" who are qualified/ordained to teach, rather than spiritualize Jesus into a Manichean falsehood.

 

[Truth7t7]

Typology is the study of foreshadow, so you can't read Isaiah 22 as a proof text. That is not how I presented it. It is prophetic, but not a prophecy per se. You have no criteria to determine what parts of the OT apply only to Israel and what parts apply to the Church. You don't have enough faith to believe that Jesus, the High Priest, has the authority to appoint an earthly steward. An invisible church cannot bind and loose anything. You haven't addressed the issue of "keys" either.


God is also called rock, that is a Catholic teaching you borrowed from us.

I would rather look to "men" who are qualified/ordained to teach, rather than spiritualize Jesus into a Manichean falsehood.

As the Roman Catholic Falsehood's Seen Below.

Carm

A list of false teachings in the Roman Catholic Church

Following is a summarized paragraph with references found in the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) of many of the false teachings of Roman Catholicism. How do we know they are false? By comparing Scripture with what is taught.

-----------------------

1.)The Catholic Church is the one true church (CCC 2105)
2.) Infallibility of the Catholic Church, (CCC 2035)
3.) Only the Roman Catholic Church has authority to interpret Scripture (CCC 100)
4.)The Pope is the head of the church and has the authority of Christ (CCC 2034)
5.)The Roman Catholic Church is necessary for salvation (CCC 846)
6.)Sacred Tradition equal to scripture (CCC 82)
7.)Forgiveness of sins, salvation, is by faith and works (CCC 2036 CCC 2080 2068)
8.)Full benefit of Salvation is only through the Roman Catholic Church (Vatican 2, Decree on Ecumenism, 3)
9.)Grace can be merited (CCC 2010 CCC 2027)
10.)The merit of Mary and the Saints can be applied to Catholics and others (1477) 11.)Penance is necessary for salvation (CCC 980)
12.)Purgatory (CCC 1031 CCC 1475)
13.)Indulgences (CCC 1471 CCC 1478 CCC 1498 CCC 1472)
15.)Mary is Mediatrix (CCC 969)
16.) Mary brings us the gifts of eternal salvation (CCC 969)
17.)Mary delivers souls from death (CCC 966)
18.)Prayer to the saints (CCC 2677)
19.)The Communion elements become the actual body and blood of Christ (CCC 1374 CCC 1376).