Differences between Catholics and Protestants

civic

Well-known member
One of the first major differences between Catholicism and Protestantism is the issue of the sufficiency and authority of Scripture. Protestants believe that the Bible alone is the source of God’s special revelation to mankind and teaches us all that is necessary for our salvation from sin. Protestants view the Bible as the standard by which all Christian behavior must be measured. This belief is commonly referred to as “sola scriptura” and is one of the “five solas” (sola is Latin for “alone”) that came out of the Protestant Reformation.

There are many verses in the Bible that establish its authority and claim it to be sufficient for all matters of faith and practice. One of the clearest is 2 Timothy 3:16, where we see that “all Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.” Catholics reject the doctrine of sola scriptura and do not believe that the Bible alone is sufficient. They believe that both the Bible and sacred Roman Catholic tradition are equally binding upon the Christian. Many Roman Catholics doctrines, such as purgatory, praying to the saints, worship or veneration of Mary, etc., have little or no basis in Scripture but are based solely on Roman Catholic traditions. The Roman Catholic Church’s insistence that the Bible and tradition are equal in authority undermines the sufficiency, authority, and completeness of the Bible. The view of Scripture is at the root of many, if not all, of the differences between Catholics and Protestants.

Another disagreement between Catholicism and Protestantism is over the office and authority of the Pope. According to Catholicism the Pope is the “Vicar of Christ” (a vicar is a substitute) and represents Jesus as the head of the Church. As such, the Pope has the ability to speak ex cathedra (literally, “from the chair,” that is, with authority on matters of faith and practice). His pronouncements made from the seat of authority are infallible and binding upon all Christians. On the other hand, Protestants believe that no human being is infallible and that Christ alone is the Head of the Church. Catholics rely on apostolic succession as a way of establishing the Pope’s authority. Protestants believe that the church’s authority comes not from apostolic succession but from the Word of God. Catholicism teaches that only the Catholic Church can properly interpret the Bible, but Protestants believe that the Bible teaches God sent the Holy Spirit to indwell all born-again believers, enabling all believers to understand the message of the Bible (John 14:16–17, 26; 1 John 2:27).

A third major difference between Catholicism and Protestantism is how one is saved. Another of the five solas of the Reformation is sola fide (“faith alone”), which affirms the biblical doctrine of justification by grace alone through faith alone because of Christ alone (Ephesians 2:8–10). However, Catholics teach that the Christian must rely on faith plus “meritorious works” in order to be saved. Essential to the Roman Catholic doctrine of salvation are the Seven Sacraments, which are baptism, confirmation, the Eucharist, penance, anointing of the sick, holy orders, and matrimony. Protestants believe that, on the basis of faith in Christ alone, believers are justified by God, as all their sins are paid for by Christ on the cross and His righteousness is imputed to them. Catholics, on the other hand, believe that Christ’s righteousness is imparted to the believer by “grace through faith,” but that in itself is not sufficient to justify the believer. The believer must supplement the righteousness of Christ imparted to him with meritorious works.

Catholics and Protestants also disagree on what it means to be justified before God. To the Catholic, justification involves being made righteous and holy. He believes that faith in Christ is only the beginning of salvation and that the individual must build upon that with good works because God’s grace of eternal salvation must be merited. This view of justification contradicts the clear teaching of Scripture in passages such as Romans 4:1–12 and Titus 3:3–7. Protestants distinguish between the one-time act of justification (when we are declared righteous by God based on our faith in Christ’s atonement on the cross) and the process of sanctification (the development of righteousness that continues throughout our lives on earth). Protestants recognize that works are important, but they believe the works are the result or fruit of salvation—never the means to it. Catholics blend justification and sanctification together into one ongoing process, which leads to confusion about how one is saved.

A fourth major difference between Catholics and Protestants has to do with what happens after death. Both groups teach that unbelievers will spend eternity in hell, but there are significant differences about what happens to believers. From their church traditions and their reliance on non-canonical books, the Catholics have developed the doctrine of purgatory. Purgatory, according to the Catholic Encyclopedia, is a “place or condition of temporal punishment for those who, departing this life in God’s grace, are not entirely free from venial faults, or have not fully paid the satisfaction due to their transgressions” (Hanna, E., “Purgatory,” The Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 12. Robert Appleton Company, 1911). On the other hand, Protestants believe that we are justified by faith in Christ alone and that Christ’s righteousness is imputed to us; therefore, when we die, we will go straight to heaven to be in the presence of the Lord (2 Corinthians 5:6–10 and Philippians 1:23).

One disturbing aspect about the Catholic doctrine of purgatory is the belief that man can and must pay for his own sins. This results in a low view of the sufficiency and efficiency of Christ’s atonement on the cross. Simply put, the Roman Catholic view of salvation implies that Christ’s atonement on the cross was insufficient payment for the sins of those who believe in Him and that even a believer must pay for his own sins, either through acts of penance or time in purgatory. Yet the Bible teaches that it is Christ’s death alone that can satisfy or propitiate God’s wrath against sinners (Romans 3:25; Hebrews 2:17; 1 John 2:2; 1 John 4:10). Our works of righteousness cannot add to what Christ has already accomplished.

The differences between Catholicism and evangelical Protestants are important and significant. Paul wrote Galatians to combat the Judaizers (Jews who said that Gentile Christians had to obey the Old Testament Law to be saved). Like the Judaizers, Catholics make human works necessary for one to be justified by God, and they end up with a completely different gospel.

It is our prayer that God will open the eyes of those who are putting their faith in the teachings of the Catholic Church. It is our hope that everyone will understand that “works of righteousness” cannot justify or sanctify a person (Isaiah 64:6). We pray that all will put their faith solely in Christ and the fact that we are “justified freely by [God’s] grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. God presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement, through the shedding of his blood—to be received by faith” (Romans 3:24–25). God saves us, “not because of righteous things we had done, but because of his mercy. He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit, whom he poured out on us generously through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that, having been justified by his grace, we might become heirs having the hope of eternal life” (Titus 3:5–7).got ?

hope this helps !!!
 
I've always wondered why in the Catholic Church they call the priests father. From what I understand that goes against what the Bible teaches.

Do not call anyone on earth [who guides you spiritually] your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven. Matthew 23:9
 
I've always wondered why in the Catholic Church they call the priests father. From what I understand that goes against what the Bible teaches.

Do not call anyone on earth [who guides you spiritually] your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven. Matthew 23:9
Ditto
 
One of the first major differences between Catholicism and Protestantism is the issue of the sufficiency and authority of Scripture. Protestants believe that the Bible alone is the source of God’s special revelation to mankind and teaches us all that is necessary for our salvation from sin. Protestants view the Bible as the standard by which all Christian behavior must be measured. This belief is commonly referred to as “sola scriptura” and is one of the “five solas” (sola is Latin for “alone”) that came out of the Protestant Reformation.

There are many verses in the Bible that establish its authority and claim it to be sufficient for all matters of faith and practice. One of the clearest is 2 Timothy 3:16, where we see that “all Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.” Catholics reject the doctrine of sola scriptura and do not believe that the Bible alone is sufficient. They believe that both the Bible and sacred Roman Catholic tradition are equally binding upon the Christian. Many Roman Catholics doctrines, such as purgatory, praying to the saints, worship or veneration of Mary, etc., have little or no basis in Scripture but are based solely on Roman Catholic traditions. The Roman Catholic Church’s insistence that the Bible and tradition are equal in authority undermines the sufficiency, authority, and completeness of the Bible. The view of Scripture is at the root of many, if not all, of the differences between Catholics and Protestants.

Another disagreement between Catholicism and Protestantism is over the office and authority of the Pope. According to Catholicism the Pope is the “Vicar of Christ” (a vicar is a substitute) and represents Jesus as the head of the Church. As such, the Pope has the ability to speak ex cathedra (literally, “from the chair,” that is, with authority on matters of faith and practice). His pronouncements made from the seat of authority are infallible and binding upon all Christians. On the other hand, Protestants believe that no human being is infallible and that Christ alone is the Head of the Church. Catholics rely on apostolic succession as a way of establishing the Pope’s authority. Protestants believe that the church’s authority comes not from apostolic succession but from the Word of God. Catholicism teaches that only the Catholic Church can properly interpret the Bible, but Protestants believe that the Bible teaches God sent the Holy Spirit to indwell all born-again believers, enabling all believers to understand the message of the Bible (John 14:16–17, 26; 1 John 2:27).

A third major difference between Catholicism and Protestantism is how one is saved. Another of the five solas of the Reformation is sola fide (“faith alone”), which affirms the biblical doctrine of justification by grace alone through faith alone because of Christ alone (Ephesians 2:8–10). However, Catholics teach that the Christian must rely on faith plus “meritorious works” in order to be saved. Essential to the Roman Catholic doctrine of salvation are the Seven Sacraments, which are baptism, confirmation, the Eucharist, penance, anointing of the sick, holy orders, and matrimony. Protestants believe that, on the basis of faith in Christ alone, believers are justified by God, as all their sins are paid for by Christ on the cross and His righteousness is imputed to them. Catholics, on the other hand, believe that Christ’s righteousness is imparted to the believer by “grace through faith,” but that in itself is not sufficient to justify the believer. The believer must supplement the righteousness of Christ imparted to him with meritorious works.

Catholics and Protestants also disagree on what it means to be justified before God. To the Catholic, justification involves being made righteous and holy. He believes that faith in Christ is only the beginning of salvation and that the individual must build upon that with good works because God’s grace of eternal salvation must be merited. This view of justification contradicts the clear teaching of Scripture in passages such as Romans 4:1–12 and Titus 3:3–7. Protestants distinguish between the one-time act of justification (when we are declared righteous by God based on our faith in Christ’s atonement on the cross) and the process of sanctification (the development of righteousness that continues throughout our lives on earth). Protestants recognize that works are important, but they believe the works are the result or fruit of salvation—never the means to it. Catholics blend justification and sanctification together into one ongoing process, which leads to confusion about how one is saved.

A fourth major difference between Catholics and Protestants has to do with what happens after death. Both groups teach that unbelievers will spend eternity in hell, but there are significant differences about what happens to believers. From their church traditions and their reliance on non-canonical books, the Catholics have developed the doctrine of purgatory. Purgatory, according to the Catholic Encyclopedia, is a “place or condition of temporal punishment for those who, departing this life in God’s grace, are not entirely free from venial faults, or have not fully paid the satisfaction due to their transgressions” (Hanna, E., “Purgatory,” The Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 12. Robert Appleton Company, 1911). On the other hand, Protestants believe that we are justified by faith in Christ alone and that Christ’s righteousness is imputed to us; therefore, when we die, we will go straight to heaven to be in the presence of the Lord (2 Corinthians 5:6–10 and Philippians 1:23).

One disturbing aspect about the Catholic doctrine of purgatory is the belief that man can and must pay for his own sins. This results in a low view of the sufficiency and efficiency of Christ’s atonement on the cross. Simply put, the Roman Catholic view of salvation implies that Christ’s atonement on the cross was insufficient payment for the sins of those who believe in Him and that even a believer must pay for his own sins, either through acts of penance or time in purgatory. Yet the Bible teaches that it is Christ’s death alone that can satisfy or propitiate God’s wrath against sinners (Romans 3:25; Hebrews 2:17; 1 John 2:2; 1 John 4:10). Our works of righteousness cannot add to what Christ has already accomplished.

The differences between Catholicism and evangelical Protestants are important and significant. Paul wrote Galatians to combat the Judaizers (Jews who said that Gentile Christians had to obey the Old Testament Law to be saved). Like the Judaizers, Catholics make human works necessary for one to be justified by God, and they end up with a completely different gospel.

It is our prayer that God will open the eyes of those who are putting their faith in the teachings of the Catholic Church. It is our hope that everyone will understand that “works of righteousness” cannot justify or sanctify a person (Isaiah 64:6). We pray that all will put their faith solely in Christ and the fact that we are “justified freely by [God’s] grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. God presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement, through the shedding of his blood—to be received by faith” (Romans 3:24–25). God saves us, “not because of righteous things we had done, but because of his mercy. He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit, whom he poured out on us generously through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that, having been justified by his grace, we might become heirs having the hope of eternal life” (Titus 3:5–7).got ?

hope this helps !!!
Hebrew script did not originally include vowel points and the promise is that a certain set of consonants can mean a lot of different things depending upon which vowels are used between them, such as between "mad", "med", "mid', "mod', or "mud". So there needed to be an oral tradition of how to read the text out loud in order to correctly understand the text. This why Orthodox Jews say that you can't know how to correct obey the Torah just by the text alone without knowing their oral traditions.

In Exodus 18, it gives instructions to set up a system of judges to make rulings about the Torah. In Deuteronomy 17:8-13, it gives authority to priests and judges to make rulings about the Torah that the people were obligated to obey. In Matthew 23:2-4, Jesus recognized that the Pharisees have this authority by saying that they sit in the Seat of Moses and by instructing his followers to do everything that they say.

In Acts 17:11, the Bereans were praised because they diligently tested everything that Paul said against OT Scriptures to see if what he said was true, so according to the precedent, agreement with OT Scriptures is the standard by which we should accept what any person says, including Paul. However, Paul was speaking as someone from outside the community and not has someone who has been vested with the authority to make rulings for that community. So there is both room for traditions and for the authority of Scripture.

The keys to issue of faith and works is understanding that to experience of doing certain works can itself be the content of a gift and people can act in a way that expresses their faith, which is the way to have faith, not the way to supplement our faith with our works. Works can be done for many reasons other than in order to earn our salvation as a wage, so the fact that we do not earn our salvation by our works does not mean that our salvation does not require us to do works for other reasons, such as faith. So thinking the our salvation requires us to choose to do works in order to earn it as a wage is contrary to many verses and is in line with the position of the Judiazers, while thinking that our salvation requires us to choose to do works is supported by many verses and is not the position of the Judaizers. For example, in Hebrews 5:9, Jesus has become a source of eternal salvation for those who obey Him, so it is clear that our eternal salvation requires us to choose to obey Jesus, but not in order to earn it as a wage.

Isaiah 64:6 has nothing to do with the issues of works and faith or works righteousness, but is simply the people hyperbolically complaining about God not coming down and making His presence know. The reality is that the righteous deeds of the saints are like fine white linen (Revelation 19:8). God does not command filthy rags.
 
I've always wondered why in the Catholic Church they call the priests father. From what I understand that goes against what the Bible teaches.

Do not call anyone on earth [who guides you spiritually] your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven. Matthew 23:9
What Jesus said in the verses that come before at after Matthew 23:9 was against hypocrisy, so Matthew 23:9 is speaking against using a title in a hypocritical manner that is for show rather than speaking against using a specific title.
 
What Jesus said in the verses that come before at after Matthew 23:9 was against hypocrisy, so Matthew 23:9 is speaking against using a title in a hypocritical manner that is for show rather than speaking against using a specific title.
I can understand that and I thank you for pointing it out to me but I still have a hard time because the scripture seems pretty straightforward to me.
Matthew 23
THEN JESUS said to the multitudes and to His disciples,
2 The scribes and Pharisees sit on Moses’ seat [of authority].
3 So observe and practice all they tell you; but do not do what they do, for they preach, but do not practice.
4 They tie up heavy loads, hard to bear, and place them on men’s shoulders, but they themselves will not lift a finger to help bear them.
5 They do all their works to be seen of men; for they make wide their phylacteries (small cases enclosing certain Scripture passages, worn during prayer on the left arm and forehead) and make long their fringes [worn by all male Israelites, according to the command]. [Exod. 13:9; Num. 15:38; Deut. 6:8.]
6 And they take pleasure in and [thus] love the place of honor at feasts and the best seats in the synagogues,
7 And to be greeted with honor in the marketplaces and to have people call them rabbi.
8 But you are not to be called rabbi (teacher), for you have one Teacher and you are all brothers.
9 And do not call anyone [in the church] on earth father, for you have one Father, Who is in heaven.
10 And you must not be called masters (leaders), for you have one Master (Leader), the Christ.
11 He who is greatest among you shall be your servant.

Regardless of the reason Jesus said don't do it.
 
I can understand that and I thank you for pointing it out to me but I still have a hard time because the scripture seems pretty straightforward to me.

THEN JESUS said to the multitudes and to His disciples,
2 The scribes and Pharisees sit on Moses’ seat [of authority].
3 So observe and practice all they tell you; but do not do what they do, for they preach, but do not practice.
4 They tie up heavy loads, hard to bear, and place them on men’s shoulders, but they themselves will not lift a finger to help bear them.
5 They do all their works to be seen of men; for they make wide their phylacteries (small cases enclosing certain Scripture passages, worn during prayer on the left arm and forehead) and make long their fringes [worn by all male Israelites, according to the command]. [Exod. 13:9; Num. 15:38; Deut. 6:8.]
6 And they take pleasure in and [thus] love the place of honor at feasts and the best seats in the synagogues,
7 And to be greeted with honor in the marketplaces and to have people call them rabbi.
8 But you are not to be called rabbi (teacher), for you have one Teacher and you are all brothers.
9 And do not call anyone [in the church] on earth father, for you have one Father, Who is in heaven.
10 And you must not be called masters (leaders), for you have one Master (Leader), the Christ.
11 He who is greatest among you shall be your servant.

Regardless of the reason Jesus said don't do it.
Jesus instructed then to observe and practice all Pharisee tell you, but to not do what they do, so if a Pharisee told us to do something that they also practiced, then should we do what they said or avoid what they practiced? If a Pharisee honored their parents, do you think that Jesus was instructing us to avoid doing that? If Pharisee drank wanter, ate food, and breathed air, then should we avoid doing that too? I think it is clear that was Jesus was telling us not to do was specifically not to follow their examples of pride and hypocrisy. There is nothing innately hypocritical about the title, but the problem is that they wanted the prestige and recognition. Someone could use a different set of titles than the ones that Jesus listed in verses 8-10 and be in accordance with the letter of what he instructed, but if someone was still about prestige, recognition, pride, and hypocrisy, then they would still be part of the problem that he was addressing.
 
That sounds good. I can see a similarity between the Roman Catholic Church in the Pharisees.

Then You have the Catholic Church Church sequestering their sanctioned Bible from the populace. Like the regular people couldn't be trusted with it, The historic prohibitions against Christians reading the New Testament on their own, or worse, translating the Bible into a native language.

I looked this up...Decree of the Council of Toulouse (1229 C.E.): "We prohibit also that the laity should be permitted to have the books of the Old or New Testament; but we most strictly forbid their having any translation of these books."

So the people would have no way of knowing what Jesus said about calling no man father. That's pretty much a red flag right there. If Christians had access to the Bible in its entirety, they might have noticed what leaped out at me about calling no man father.
 
Jesus instructed then to observe and practice all Pharisee tell you, but to not do what they do, so if a Pharisee told us to do something that they also practiced, then should we do what they said or avoid what they practiced? If a Pharisee honored their parents, do you think that Jesus was instructing us to avoid doing that? If Pharisee drank wanter, ate food, and breathed air, then should we avoid doing that too? I think it is clear that was Jesus was telling us not to do was specifically not to follow their examples of pride and hypocrisy. There is nothing innately hypocritical about the title, but the problem is that they wanted the prestige and recognition. Someone could use a different set of titles than the ones that Jesus listed in verses 8-10 and be in accordance with the letter of what he instructed, but if someone was still about prestige, recognition, pride, and hypocrisy, then they would still be part of the problem that he was addressing.
Micah 6:8 "He hath shewed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the LORD require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God?"

so are you going to obey God or a Pharisee? should not a Pharisee obey God also? so he should not be doing anything that contradict God command correct?

101G.
 
Micah 6:8 "He hath shewed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the LORD require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God?"

so are you going to obey God or a Pharisee? should not a Pharisee obey God also? so he should not be doing anything that contradict God command correct?

101G.
That is a false dichotomy because Jesus instructed his followers in Matthew 23:2-4 to obey whatever the Pharisees said in accordance with Deuteronomy 17:8-13. Yes a Pharisee should obey God also, so he should not be doing anything that contradicts His commands.
 
Yes a Pharisee should obey God also, so he should not be doing anything that contradicts His commands.
thank you. 1 Thessalonians 5:21 "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." 1 Thessalonians 5:22 "Abstain from all appearance of evil."

understand, when the Lord Jesus told them to obey the Pharisee, THAT WAS UNDER THE OLD COVENANT. for they were responsible unto God. listen to a perfect example. Ezekiel 3:16 "And it came to pass at the end of seven days, that the word of the LORD came unto me, saying," Ezekiel 3:17 "Son of man, I have made thee a watchman unto the house of Israel: therefore hear the word at my mouth, and give them warning from me." Ezekiel 3:18 "When I say unto the wicked, Thou shalt surely die; and thou givest him not warning, nor speakest to warn the wicked from his wicked way, to save his life; the same wicked man shall die in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at thine hand." Ezekiel 3:19 "Yet if thou warn the wicked, and he turn not from his wickedness, nor from his wicked way, he shall die in his iniquity; but thou hast delivered thy soul." Ezekiel 3:20 "Again, When a righteous man doth turn from his righteousness, and commit iniquity, and I lay a stumblingblock before him, he shall die: because thou hast not given him warning, he shall die in his sin, and his righteousness which he hath done shall not be remembered; but his blood will I require at thine hand." Ezekiel 3:21 "Nevertheless if thou warn the righteous man, that the righteous sin not, and he doth not sin, he shall surely live, because he is warned; also thou hast delivered thy soul."

so, if the Pharisee guided wrong, the people is not at risk, but Pharisee themselves was.

101G.
 
I find Catholics second only to Pentecostals in the amount of exercise they get in a worship service - sit, stand, kneel, repeat. Most Protestants stand only briefly - for the reading of scripture - and MAYBE get to shake a few hands before service. In contrast, a good Pentecostal Service is a non-stop "cardio workout".

Beyond that, the differences are on a THEORETICAL level that few participants even understand. [How many in a Church can even articulate the details of their church's position on the PRESENCE in the Eucharist?]
 
thank you. 1 Thessalonians 5:21 "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." 1 Thessalonians 5:22 "Abstain from all appearance of evil."

understand, when the Lord Jesus told them to obey the Pharisee, THAT WAS UNDER THE OLD COVENANT. for they were responsible unto God. listen to a perfect example. Ezekiel 3:16 "And it came to pass at the end of seven days, that the word of the LORD came unto me, saying," Ezekiel 3:17 "Son of man, I have made thee a watchman unto the house of Israel: therefore hear the word at my mouth, and give them warning from me." Ezekiel 3:18 "When I say unto the wicked, Thou shalt surely die; and thou givest him not warning, nor speakest to warn the wicked from his wicked way, to save his life; the same wicked man shall die in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at thine hand." Ezekiel 3:19 "Yet if thou warn the wicked, and he turn not from his wickedness, nor from his wicked way, he shall die in his iniquity; but thou hast delivered thy soul." Ezekiel 3:20 "Again, When a righteous man doth turn from his righteousness, and commit iniquity, and I lay a stumblingblock before him, he shall die: because thou hast not given him warning, he shall die in his sin, and his righteousness which he hath done shall not be remembered; but his blood will I require at thine hand." Ezekiel 3:21 "Nevertheless if thou warn the righteous man, that the righteous sin not, and he doth not sin, he shall surely live, because he is warned; also thou hast delivered thy soul."

so, if the Pharisee guided wrong, the people is not at risk, but Pharisee themselves was.

101G.
Agreed.
 
Jesus instructed then to observe and practice all Pharisee tell you, but to not do what they do, so if a Pharisee told us to do something that they also practiced, then should we do what they said or avoid what they practiced? If a Pharisee honored their parents, do you think that Jesus was instructing us to avoid doing that? If Pharisee drank wanter, ate food, and breathed air, then should we avoid doing that too? I think it is clear that was Jesus was telling us not to do was specifically not to follow their examples of pride and hypocrisy. There is nothing innately hypocritical about the title, but the problem is that they wanted the prestige and recognition. Someone could use a different set of titles than the ones that Jesus listed in verses 8-10 and be in accordance with the letter of what he instructed, but if someone was still about prestige, recognition, pride, and hypocrisy, then they would still be part of the problem that he was addressing.
I would imagine Jesus meant don't do the negative things they do. Nobody in the right mind would stop drinking water eating food or breathing air. You'd have to hang yourself to stop breathing air and I don't think Jesus was condoning suicide. Jesus was pretty much the opposite in the way he handled himself both privately and in public then the Pharisees. You don't see any Pharisees hanging out with tax collectors or prostitutes or healing lepers. They were into themselves, they're nice seats in the synagogue and they're fancy robes with the tassels on the bottom. Whereas Jesus was into loving us.
 
I would imagine Jesus meant don't do the negative things they do. Nobody in the right mind would stop drinking water eating food or breathing air. You'd have to hang yourself to stop breathing air and I don't think Jesus was condoning suicide. Jesus was pretty much the opposite in the way he handled himself both privately and in public then the Pharisees. You don't see any Pharisees hanging out with tax collectors or prostitutes or healing lepers. They were into themselves, they're nice seats in the synagogue and they're fancy robes with the tassels on the bottom. Whereas Jesus was into loving us.
Indeed, I was speaking about eating, drinking, and breathing to make the point that Jesus instructing not to do as they did was speaking specifically about not following their example of hypocrisy. Pharisees criticized other Pharisees for their hypocrisy, so Jesus was not the only one to do that. Like any group, there were members who had a range of adherence to what they taught, so it is not as though every last Pharisee were a hypocrite. For example, Paul never stopped identifying as a Pharisee (Acts 23:6) and Pharisees were included among the believers (Acts 15:5). In regard to the debate between Hillel and Shammai, Jesus was virtually in complete agreement with Hillel.
 
Indeed, I was speaking about eating, drinking, and breathing to make the point that Jesus instructing not to do as they did was speaking specifically about not following their example of hypocrisy. Pharisees criticized other Pharisees for their hypocrisy, so Jesus was not the only one to do that. Like any group, there were members who had a range of adherence to what they taught, so it is not as though every last Pharisee were a hypocrite. For example, Paul never stopped identifying as a Pharisee (Acts 23:6) and Pharisees were included among the believers (Acts 15:5). In regard to the debate between Hillel and Shammai, Jesus was virtually in complete agreement with Hillel.
Yes I got ya. Thanks for the info. I can tell you know what your talking about. I'm just learning.
 
Indeed, I was speaking about eating, drinking, and breathing to make the point that Jesus instructing not to do as they did was speaking specifically about not following their example of hypocrisy. Pharisees criticized other Pharisees for their hypocrisy, so Jesus was not the only one to do that. Like any group, there were members who had a range of adherence to what they taught, so it is not as though every last Pharisee were a hypocrite. For example, Paul never stopped identifying as a Pharisee (Acts 23:6) and Pharisees were included among the believers (Acts 15:5). In regard to the debate between Hillel and Shammai, Jesus was virtually in complete agreement with Hillel.
I am sure you wouldn't claim the Pharisees were teaching correct doctrine when they were castigating and persecuting Jesus for healing folk on the Sabbath right? Yet scripture said Jesus 'broke' the Sabbath. How did He do that, and whose version of Sabbath keeping was He 'breaking'? Doing what they say, and not doing as they do, seems to me to have a somewhat limited scope, especially when one considers the fact that the Jews since their return from Babylon had become super strict on Sabbath observance, not wanting a return to captivity.
 
I am sure you wouldn't claim the Pharisees were teaching correct doctrine when they were castigating and persecuting Jesus for healing folk on the Sabbath right? Yet scripture said Jesus 'broke' the Sabbath. How did He do that, and whose version of Sabbath keeping was He 'breaking'? Doing what they say, and not doing as they do, seems to me to have a somewhat limited scope, especially when one considers the fact that the Jews since their return from Babylon had become super strict on Sabbath observance, not wanting a return to captivity.
I think that it is very likely that the Pharisees who were against Jesus healing on the Sabbath were from the House of Shammai. Scripture does not actually state that Jesus broke the Sabbath, but that the reason that they had for wanting to kill him was that he broke the Sabbath. It is contradictory to believe both that Jesus was correct about it being lawful to heal on the Sabbath and that those Pharisees were correct about Jesus breaking the Sabbath by healing on it. It is lawful to heal on the Sabbath, so their reason for wanting to kill him was incorrect, but it explains why they wanted to kill him. If Jesus had wanted to debate matters of halakhah, then he could have quoted Rabbi Yehuda as saying that a man is permitted to use his hand to crush grains of wheat on the Sabbath as long as he doesn't use a tool.

Ancient synagogues had a structure called the Seat of Moses and the person who sat there had the authority to making rulings for that community in regard to how to correctly obey the Torah, which is an authority that Jesus recognized. It would probably show up on an image search if your are curious.
 
All I need to know about how Jesus viewed the Pharisees and their interpretation of the Law is in Matthew 23. Here's two.

[Mat 23:13, 15 LSB] 13 "But woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, because you shut off the kingdom of heaven from people; for you do not enter in yourselves, nor do you allow those who are entering to go in. ...
15 "Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, because you travel around on sea and land to make one proselyte; and when he becomes one, you make him twice as much a son of hell as yourselves.
 
All I need to know about how Jesus viewed the Pharisees and their interpretation of the Law is in Matthew 23. Here's two.

[Mat 23:13, 15 LSB] 13 "But woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, because you shut off the kingdom of heaven from people; for you do not enter in yourselves, nor do you allow those who are entering to go in. ...
15 "Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, because you travel around on sea and land to make one proselyte; and when he becomes one, you make him twice as much a son of hell as yourselves.
Some Pharisees criticized other Pharisees as being hypocrites, so Jesus was not the only one to do that. People can criticize the members of the group while even be members themselves of that group while not being against the group itself. For example, members of denomination can harshly criticize some of the leaders of that denomination for committing sexual sins while not finding fault with what the denomination itself teaches.
 
Back
Top Bottom