[count-your-change]

“If Christian worship is not an example of the most blatant violation of Jesus’ words I don't know what is!”

Don't get your hair shirt in a knot here. Much of what purports to be “Christian” is such only nominally and would be unrecognizable to any of Christ's apostles should they take a tour of Christendom in the flesh today.
They could certainly repeat with fervor Jesus’ words of Matt. 7, ‘I never knew you’. It was less for what the objects of that dismissal did than the spirit in which they acted.

On that we can agree and it's hardly news to any thoughtful person. But I find it curious that a person such as yourself who has obviously been educated in the background and contents of the Bible so easily misses or ignores what it says at times.
Example?

“to pray thus” you quote. What does that mean? That only those words can be used in prayer? Obviously not as the entire seventeenth chapter of John is a prayer offered by Jesus. He parayed out of doors at Gethsemane (Matt.26:36), he prayed before thousands. (Matt. 14:19)

So how does one “pray thus”? “outos”, In this fashion, in this way, so, thus. What Jesus said carries no thought of repeating verbatim that model of priorities that deserve prayer. (Matt. 6:9)
Peter and John prayed in a group with an ‘invented’ prayer.(Acts 4:24-30)

“If Christian worship is not an example of the most blatant violation of Jesus’ words I don't know what is!”

Curiously you're silent on the most obvious and truly blatant violations of Jesus words about being a follower of him, being Christian.

Try to imagine Peter in papal regalia or John taking or accepting titles of “Reverend, Father, Most Reverend, Holy Father”, and what self glorifying distinctions religious “leaders”, Catholic and otherwise, lay upon each other.

Or picture Paul saying he would preach to the Gentiles only if he had the right robes and rituals and suitably impressive building.
Instead he preached in the public squares and in peoples’s homes. (Acts 20:20)

“Or maybe some people think the verses apply only to the hypocrites and of course no Christian sect will consider itself hypocritical, so it must not apply to them!”

Then measure ALL, church, sect, branch, faith tradition, rite, orthodox and schismatic, protester and traditionalist against all the verses of the Bible if any are to measured against any of its verses.

“If Christian worship is not an example of the most blatant violation of Jesus’ words I don't know what is!”

Do you know what Christian worship is as distinguished from what passes today as “Christian” worship and doctrine?

[kosta50]

“to pray thus” you quote. What does that mean? That only those words can be used in prayer?

The word outos is used numerous times in the New Testament and it pretty much means this is how you should do it.  It is an authoritative expression, a command of how things are to be arranged or settled, etc. There is an entire encyclopedic compendium on this term that pretty much states this is how you will do this. It's not a statement of principle.

Obviously not as the entire seventeenth chapter of John is a prayer offered by Jesus. He parayed out of doors at Gethsemane (Matt.26:36), he prayed before thousands. (Matt. 14:19)

I will not comment on John here because it is not a simple subject to comment on, given the luggage attached to "John's" Gospel. Perhaps on another thread.

Re: Matthew 26:36 Jesus removed himself from all but two disciples, and then walked away form them as well in order to pray alone, and not in front of them. In Matthew 14, he merely gave blessings (thanks), which can not be construed as "prayer".

The specific word is eulogeo (from which the English word eulogy comes from) and which in Greek means praise.

The Greek word for "to pray" is proseuchomai. The root of this word (euchomai) means to wish or ask for; and pros means towards. Thus pros+euchomai means placing your wish towards someone, stating your wish, asking for a favor, a petition; it is never confused with praise (eulogeo).

So how does one “pray thus”? “outos”,  In this fashion, in this way, so, thus. What Jesus said carries no thought of repeating verbatim that model of priorities that deserve prayer. (Matt. 6:9)

But if you bothered to read Luke 11:2-4 the text reads "When you pray say: Father hallowed be your name..." The tense is present, active, imperative: legete. There is no confusion that he meant for the prayer to be said in those words.

Peter and John prayed in a group with an ‘invented’ prayer.(Acts 4:24-30)

They also went to Jeruslaem when Jesus told them not to go there. And they went to Samaria when Jesus told them not to go there. And they baptized in his name (Act 2:380, 8:12, 8:16, 10:48) instead of following the Greayt Commisison's (alleged) Triniatrian formula (Mat 28:19), etc.

Try to imagine Peter in papal regalia or John taking or accepting titles of “Reverend, Father, Most Reverend, Holy Father”, and what self glorifying distinctions religious “leaders”, Catholic and otherwise, lay upon each other.

You are mixing ecclesiology with theology. The idea of God appointing people in different capacities in the Church came from Paul (1 Cor 12:28). jesus only speaks of him being appointed. But nothing in the NT forbids formation of church titles and administrative positions, or robes and vestments.

Not to neglect to remember that in the ancient times, vestments were important identifiers of who you were and what your business was. Today they represent the unchanging tradition of the Church.

Or picture Paul saying he would preach to the Gentiles only if he had the right robes and rituals and suitably impressive building. Instead he preached in the public squares and in peoples’s homes. (Acts 20:20)

Well, Christian movement had a humble beginning, as all movements do, even those that become world-wide. Wen Paul preached, Christianity was a Jewish sect that had no statute of significance in the pagan world.

Then measure ALL, church, sect, branch, faith tradition, rite, orthodox and schismatic, protester and traditionalist against all the verses of the Bible if any are to measured against any of its verses.

The Bible is not about the Church. Ecclesiology is a different subject, not covered in the Bible.

Do you know what Christian worship is as distinguished from what passes today as “Christian” worship and doctrine?

Why, sure. The liturgical worship of the catholic and Apostolic Church, as it was established in the early Church, based on Judaic worship services. The New Testament, it should be mentioned, says very little if anything about how to worship.

“to pray thus” you quote. What does that mean? That only those words can be used in prayer?

The word outos is used numerous times in the New Testament and it pretty much means this is how you should do it.  It is an authoritative expression, a command of how things are to be arranged or settled, etc. There is an entire encyclopedic compendium on this term that pretty much states this is how you will do this. It's not a statement of principle.

Obviously not as the entire seventeenth chapter of John is a prayer offered by Jesus. He parayed out of doors at Gethsemane (Matt.26:36), he prayed before thousands. (Matt. 14:19)

I will not comment on John here because it is not a simple subject to comment on, given the luggage attached to "John's" Gospel. Perhaps on another thread.

Re: Matthew 26:36 Jesus removed himself from all but two disciples, and then walked away form them as well in order to pray alone, and not in front of them. In Matthew 14, he merely gave blessings (thanks), which can not be construed as "prayer".

The specific word is eulogeo (from which the English word eulogy comes from) and which in Greek means praise.

The Greek word for "to pray" is proseuchomai. The root of this word (euchomai) means to wish or ask for; and pros means towards. Thus pros+euchomai means placing your wish towards someone, stating your wish, asking for a favor, a petition; it is never confused with praise (eulogeo).

So how does one “pray thus”? “outos”,  In this fashion, in this way, so, thus. What Jesus said carries no thought of repeating verbatim that model of priorities that deserve prayer. (Matt. 6:9)

But if you bothered to read Luke 11:2-4 the text reads "When you pray say: Father hallowed be your name..." The tense is present, active, imperative: legete. There is no confusion that he meant for the prayer to be said in those words.

Peter and John prayed in a group with an ‘invented’ prayer.(Acts 4:24-30)

They also went to Jeruslaem when Jesus told them not to go there. And they went to Samaria when Jesus told them not to go there. And they baptized in his name (Act 2:380, 8:12, 8:16, 10:48) instead of following the Greayt Commisison's (alleged) Triniatrian formula (Mat 28:19), etc.

Try to imagine Peter in papal regalia or John taking or accepting titles of “Reverend, Father, Most Reverend, Holy Father”, and what self glorifying distinctions religious “leaders”, Catholic and otherwise, lay upon each other.

You are mixing ecclesiology with theology. The idea of God appointing people in different capacities in the Church came from Paul (1 Cor 12:28). jesus only speaks of him being appointed. But nothing in the NT forbids formation of church titles and administrative positions, or robes and vestments.

Not to neglect to remember that in the ancient times, vestments were important identifiers of who you were and what your business was. Today they represent the unchanging tradition of the Church.

Or picture Paul saying he would preach to the Gentiles only if he had the right robes and rituals and suitably impressive building. Instead he preached in the public squares and in peoples’s homes. (Acts 20:20)

Well, Christian movement had a humble beginning, as all movements do, even those that become world-wide. Wen Paul preached, Christianity was a Jewish sect that had no statute of significance in the pagan world.

Then measure ALL, church, sect, branch, faith tradition, rite, orthodox and schismatic, protester and traditionalist against all the verses of the Bible if any are to measured against any of its verses.

The Bible is not about the Church. Ecclesiology is a different subject, not covered in the Bible.

Do you know what Christian worship is as distinguished from what passes today as “Christian” worship and doctrine?

Why, sure. The liturgical worship of the catholic and Apostolic Church, as it was established in the early Church, based on Judaic worship services. The New Testament, it should be mentioned, says very little if anything about how to worship.