The church had within it artists. If the Apostles wished to have statues of themselves erected, they could easily have had it done.
Suits, because they match what society is wearing, just like how the Apostles dressed. There is no record of, for example, Peter or Paul wearing priest's robes. They were men of the people and did not dress to draw attention to themselves.
I would then just ask you to state for the record that you hold Protestants to be your equals in the Kingdom.
In the eyes of God all of his creatures are equal. That’s what I believe. I don’t see how anyone can see it any other way.
The Temple had cherubim and priestly garments, and yes, both cherubim and priests were venerated.
Thank you.
1. That's not what I asked, is it?
So, assuming that the Father had told the Messiah when His time was, you're saying that just because she mentioned to her son that the wine had run out, that it was enough to get the Father to change His plans?
Now you want priestly robes to exactly copy Jewish priestly robes that could only be worn by Levites? Catholic/Orthodox priests are not Levites.
I don't understand what your point is in this instance with the word, "deferential."
No. That’s not what I am saying. I said what I meant. There’s no need to make assumptions.
So, they made up some fancy robes and hats for the power structure to wear because they wanted to be like the Levites when the Apostles did no such thing? That does not scream "We're following Apostolic traditions" to me. To me, following the Apostolic traditions would be the Church leaders looking like everyone else and being set apart by the Holy Spirit for leadership. I firmly believe the Apostles would have rejected any ostentatious displays.
The Apostles were against priestly robes? Jesus was against priestly robes? This would have been very controversial and something that surely would have shown up in the Gospel. However, given your philosophy, I imagine you only have one shirt as you always give your second shirt to someone who has no shirt--and the same with all the extra food in your cupboards?
The Apostles would not have worn such robes. Why would Catholic Church leaders do so, if they are following Apostolic tradition?
I have no interest in proving anything. I am puzzled by your interest in nitpicking anything Catholic. When the history and reasons are offered, you nitpick those. Perhaps it is you who needs to prove you're in the right? Why is this? In any case, simply assure yourself you are right and move on as you have no interest in learning the background of why Catholics do anything.
On the contrary, I offer an outsider's perspective on things Catholic. I don't know why you guys are so fascinating to me, you just are. I am interested in why Catholics do things and when I hear a reason that doesn't sound logical or Biblical, I pursue it to see if it's something I should be doing. Thus far, I have not found many of those.
Please provide a specific example.
Pretty much any time we talk about things central to Catholic dogma. The veneration of Mary, praying to dead saints, transubstantiation, that sort of thing. If I disagree and bring Scripture with me, it gets strident fast.
You are not Catholic. There is no reason for you to agree with any Catholic dogma. And, as you have made up your mind, there is no reason for you to take any interest in it. Unless, of course, your only interest and objective is to tell those who practice the Catholic faith how wrong they are.
I am always wanting to be sure I am in right standing before God. If someone has a practice or belief that I do not, I don't simply ignore them, I look to see if it is something I should consider and/or adopt.
Experience tells me otherwise. You have already decided what is right--at least for you--and rail against anything else. You do not listen, you do not see any perspective other than your own.
