• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Paul and Peter

Status
Not open for further replies.

Ormly

Senior Veteran
Dec 11, 2004
6,230
94
✟7,151.00
Faith
Christian
Question: Why did Jesus bypass the twelve and apprehend Paul to preach the gospel and establish churches throughout the known world in the Mediterranean? Were there unresolved weaknesses in the twelve? We know there were friends of the Apostles who no doubt spoke of Christ that a certain propagation took place of the word, however, there is no mention of churches being established by them. Paul who wasn't part of the twelve did the greatest works we read of.

Lets be clear about this: The Jerusalem church notwithstanding, that Peter was in charge of, Paul did the presenting of the foundation of Jesus Christ to the world in and around the Mediterranean and that he built no church upon any other foundation in those areas previously laid down by someone else, which, based upon the scriptures were slim and none.
Next to Jesus, Paul exhibited the life of Jesus' earthly life more perhaps than any other man, including Peter who had a problem with being weak from tiime to time that Paul had to deal with.

Did I overlook anything? I have my own ideas and will offer them as such.
 

Mary of Bethany

Only one thing is needful.
Site Supporter
Jul 8, 2004
7,541
1,081
✟364,556.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Hi, Ormly.

For one thing, Peter was not in charge of the church in Jerusalem. James was (see Acts 15:12-29).

Also, Paul was chosen as a Gentile, a Roman citizen, well educated, who could converse with the Greeks and others outside of the Jewish community.

Also also :) , though it's not all in the NT, we know that the other Apostles were sent to other places - like Thomas to India (to this day, Indian churches use his name), Peter to Antioch (and perhaps Rome), Andrew to Greece and the areas around the Black Sea, John the Evangelist to Asia Minor, where he died at Ephesus. My point being that Christ didn't "bypass" the other Apostles - He had specific plans for each of them to spread the Gospel.

There's no doubt that St. Paul was a very forceful and disciplined Christian, and God used him greatly to evangelize the Gentiles and teach them the faith.
 
Upvote 0

Ormly

Senior Veteran
Dec 11, 2004
6,230
94
✟7,151.00
Faith
Christian
Hi, Ormly.

For one thing, Peter was not in charge of the church in Jerusalem. James was (see Acts 15:12-29).

Also, Paul was chosen as a Gentile, a Roman citizen, well educated, who could converse with the Greeks and others outside of the Jewish community.

Also also :) , though it's not all in the NT, we know that the other Apostles were sent to other places - like Thomas to India (to this day, Indian churches use his name), Peter to Antioch (and perhaps Rome), Andrew to Greece and the areas around the Black Sea, John the Evangelist to Asia Minor, where he died at Ephesus. My point being that Christ didn't "bypass" the other Apostles - He had specific plans for each of them to spread the Gospel.

There's no doubt that St. Paul was a very forceful and disciplined Christian, and God used him greatly to evangelize the Gentiles and teach them the faith.

And is the single largest contributer to the NT writings.
 
Upvote 0

Mary of Bethany

Only one thing is needful.
Site Supporter
Jul 8, 2004
7,541
1,081
✟364,556.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
And is the single largest contributer to the NT writings.

Yes. Perhaps that was his greatest gift. Take his rabbinical training, his knowledge of Greek and the pagan world, and then add the encounter with the Risen Christ, Whose followers he had been so zealously persecuting - you get a pretty powerful proclaimer of the Gospel.

:bow:

Mary
 
Upvote 0

Ormly

Senior Veteran
Dec 11, 2004
6,230
94
✟7,151.00
Faith
Christian
Yes he is, but Mary of Bethany does bring out some great points.

Indeed. Though I did make the point of confining Paul's church building to the Met area, knowing some of the Apostles were known to have traveled elseware. For instance John had great influence in Rome. It could be that his disciples are really the ones that should be credited with beginning the orginal work in that city, with Paul visiting at a later date. Much we don't know with much being credited to Peter with little to support it but writings that are questionable at best that support a religious agenda and of necessity, dismissing the questionable parts. I wish Jesus would have been a little definitive when speaking to Peter about "The Rock" He would establish His Church upon seeing there is only one Rock in Bible mentioned for the salvation of souls . . Christ Jesus.
 
Upvote 0

Ormly

Senior Veteran
Dec 11, 2004
6,230
94
✟7,151.00
Faith
Christian
As an Orthodox Christian, I'm certainly not trying to defend St. Peter as "the Rock". My only intent is to show that all of the Apostles carried out their commission from Christ.

Mary

I don't believe I implied they didn't. We just aren't privy to all the facts, are we?

Perhaps, I should ask how it is that Paul was chosen at all given the twelve were, what they were, Apostles; sent ones; establishers; missionaries?
 
Upvote 0

Mary of Bethany

Only one thing is needful.
Site Supporter
Jul 8, 2004
7,541
1,081
✟364,556.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
I think perhaps it was this. The 12 Apostles represented the 12 Tribes of Israel, and the Gospel was first brought to the Jews. By setting apart Paul as Apostle to the Gentiles, Christ was making clear that the Gospel was for all the world. Paul was not replacing or supplanting any of the 12, but was an "addition" to the 12. So in restricting the use of Apostle to one who was taught by Christ Himself, Paul becomes the 13th - the 12 representing Israel, and the 13th representing the Gentile world.

Just a thought, since, as you say, the Scripture does not say.

Mary
 
Upvote 0

Ormly

Senior Veteran
Dec 11, 2004
6,230
94
✟7,151.00
Faith
Christian
I think perhaps it was this. The 12 Apostles represented the 12 Tribes of Israel, and the Gospel was first brought to the Jews. By setting apart Paul as Apostle to the Gentiles, Christ was making clear that the Gospel was for all the world. Paul was not replacing or supplanting any of the 12, but was an "addition" to the 12. So in restricting the use of Apostle to one who was taught by Christ Himself, Paul becomes the 13th - the 12 representing Israel, and the 13th representing the Gentile world.

Just a thought, since, as you say, the Scripture does not say.

Mary

That sounded OK to me. When we read for understanding, thoughts as that can be of insight . . . and you violate nothing. :)
 
Upvote 0

Catholic Christian

Well-Known Member
May 12, 2007
3,948
185
63
United States
✟5,032.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
And is the single largest contributer to the NT writings.
So what. Jefferson was the biggest contributor to the founding documents of the United States. Does that mean he was the first president, instead of Washington?

Your logic is flawed (as usual).
 
Upvote 0

Ormly

Senior Veteran
Dec 11, 2004
6,230
94
✟7,151.00
Faith
Christian
So what. Jefferson was the biggest contributor to the founding documents of the United States. Does that mean he was the first president, instead of Washington?

Your logic is flawed (as usual).


This from Peter:

".. .. And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction." 2 Peter 3:15-16 (KJV)
 
Upvote 0

Catholic Christian

Well-Known Member
May 12, 2007
3,948
185
63
United States
✟5,032.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
This from Peter: ".. .. And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction." 2 Peter 3:15-16 (KJV)

This from Jesus:

Matt 16:17-19: "Blessed are you, Simon Barjona, because flesh and blood did not reveal this to you, but My Father who is in heaven. I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades will not overpower it. I will give you (AA)the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and (AB)whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven."


Peter’s preeminent position among the apostles was symbolized at the very beginning of his relationship with Christ. At their first meeting, Christ told Simon that his name would thereafter be Peter, which translates as "Rock" (John 1:42). The startling thing was that—aside from the single time that Abraham is called a "rock" (Hebrew: Tsur; Aramaic: Kepha) in Isaiah 51:1-2—in the Old Testament only God was called a rock. The word rock was not used as a proper name in the ancient world. If you were to turn to a companion and say, "From now on your name is Asparagus," people would wonder: Why Asparagus? What is the meaning of it? What does it signify? Indeed, why call Simon the fisherman "Rock"? Christ was not given to meaningless gestures, and neither were the Jews as a whole when it came to names. Giving a new name meant that the status of the person was changed, as when Abram’s name was changed to Abraham (Gen.17:5), Jacob’s to Israel (Gen. 32:28), Eliakim’s to Joakim (2 Kgs. 23:34), or the names of the four Hebrew youths—Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah to Belteshazzar, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego (Dan. 1:6-7). But no Jew had ever been called "Rock." The Jews would give other names taken from nature, such as Deborah ("bee," Gen. 35:8), and Rachel ("ewe," Gen. 29:16), but never "Rock." In the New Testament James and John were nicknamed Boanerges, meaning "Sons of Thunder," by Christ, but that was never regularly used in place of their original names, and it certainly was not given as a new name. But in the case of Simon-bar-Jonah, his new name Kephas (Greek: Petros) definitely replaced the old.

lg.Peter-Keys.jpeg
 
Upvote 0

Trento

Senior Veteran
Apr 12, 2002
4,387
575
AZ. Between the Holy Cross river and the Saint Rit
Visit site
✟30,034.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Funny, Peter never seemed to have gotten that message.

If you believe that a direct Prayer for Peter By Jusus was of no avail you could be right.

Luke 22:31-32 "And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat: But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not. And when you have turned again, strengthen your brothers.
Jesus calls Peter "blessed" (makarios in Greek). This word always denotes the blessedness of the person whose relationship to God is correct and holy. Read Mt. 5:1-11; Rom. 4:7-8; Lk. 1:45. There is another word for "blessed" (eulogetos in Greek) which is used only of God and means "Praise". For example, Lk. 1:68

Remember, St. Paul was among those who fell silent at the Council of Jerusalem once St. Peter spoke.Peter’s unique authority --most especially Acts 10:1-48, where Peter exercises his power to “bind and loosen” by unilaterally admitting the first Gentiles into the Church. And, he does this after receiving a personal vision from Jesus instructing him to do so. Furthermore, in Acts 11:1-18, none of the other Apostles question Peter's authority to admit the Gentiles into the Church. Rather, they accept the unilateral decision of Peter. And, a few years later, when some Jewish Christians from the party of the Pharisees try to impose circumcision on these Gentiles, Peter (in Acts 15:7-12) gives the definitive teaching at the Jerusalem council. After he speaks, the entire assembly falls silent and all debate on the Gentile issue comes to an end.



 
Upvote 0

Ormly

Senior Veteran
Dec 11, 2004
6,230
94
✟7,151.00
Faith
Christian
If you believe that a direct Prayer for Peter By Jusus was of no avail you could be right.

Luke 22:31-32 "And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat: But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not. And when you have turned again, strengthen your brothers.
Jesus calls Peter "blessed" (makarios in Greek). This word always denotes the blessedness of the person whose relationship to God is correct and holy. Read Mt. 5:1-11; Rom. 4:7-8; Lk. 1:45. There is another word for "blessed" (eulogetos in Greek) which is used only of God and means "Praise". For example, Lk. 1:68

Remember, St. Paul was among those who fell silent at the Council of Jerusalem once St. Peter spoke.Peter’s unique authority --most especially Acts 10:1-48, where Peter exercises his power to “bind and loosen” by unilaterally admitting the first Gentiles into the Church.
He didn't bind or loosen anything. Jesus through the Holy Spirit overrode what He was about to do.

And, he does this after receiving a personal vision from Jesus instructing him to do so.

That is gross mis-representation.

Furthermore, in Acts 11:1-18, none of the other Apostles question Peter's authority to admit the Gentiles into the Church. Rather, they accept the unilateral decision of Peter.


Peter didn't make that decision, Jesus did.

And, a few years later, when some Jewish Christians from the party of the Pharisees try to impose circumcision on these Gentiles, Peter (in Acts 15:7-12) gives the definitive teaching at the Jerusalem council. After he speaks, the entire assembly falls silent and all debate on the Gentile issue comes to an end.

I am glad you noted it to be the Church at Jerusalem and not Rome where it is proven He founded nothing.


You have mis-represented the prayer of Jesus in Peter's behalf.

That's terrible.
 
Upvote 0

Trento

Senior Veteran
Apr 12, 2002
4,387
575
AZ. Between the Holy Cross river and the Saint Rit
Visit site
✟30,034.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
If you believe that a direct Prayer for Peter By Jusus was of no avail you could be right.

Luke 22:31-32 "And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat: But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not. And when you have turned again, strengthen your brothers.
Jesus calls Peter "blessed" (makarios in Greek). This word always denotes the blessedness of the person whose relationship to God is correct and holy. Read Mt. 5:1-11; Rom. 4:7-8; Lk. 1:45. There is another word for "blessed" (eulogetos in Greek) which is used only of God and means "Praise". For example, Lk. 1:68


He didn't bind or loosen anything. Jesus through the Holy Spirit overrode what He was about to do.

Where is that in Scripture?



That is gross mis-representation.


Let's see.

Act 10:9¶On the morrow, as they went on their journey, and drew nigh unto the city, Peter went up upon the housetop to pray about the sixth hour:
Act 10:10And he became very hungry, and would have eaten: but while they made ready, he fell into a trance,
Act 10:11And saw heaven opened, and a certain vessel descending unto him, as it had been a great sheet knit at the four corners, and let down to the earth:
Act 10:12Wherein were all manner of fourfooted beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air.
Act 10:13And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat.
Act 10:14But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean.
Act 10:15And the voice [spake] unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, [that] call not thou common.
Act 10:16This was done thrice: and the vessel was received up again into heaven.
Act 10:17¶Now while Peter doubted in himself what this vision which he had seen should mean, behold, the men which were sent from Cornelius had made enquiry for Simon's house, and stood before the gate,
Act 10:18And called, and asked whether Simon, which was surnamed Peter, were lodged there.
Act 10:19While Peter thought on the vision, the Spirit said unto him, Behold, three men seek thee.
Act 10:20Arise therefore, and get thee down, and go with them, doubting nothing: for I have sent them.


Peter didn't make that decision, Jesus did.

Where is that in scripture?

I am glad you noted it to be the Church at Jerusalem and not Rome where it is proven He founded nothing.


Oh Sure!


You ignore Christian History even by non Catholic Scholars.

About 34AD ( Acts 2:41), we have an early mention of Peter. Some days later, in Acts 5:19, Peter is freed from prison by an angel. He spends four years in Jerusalem (Acts 8:25). St. Paul arrived at the beginning of Peter's fourth year (Acts 9:27-28). In the same year Peter (Acts 9:32) went to Joppe, raised Tabitha, and had the linen vision (Acts 10:11-12). After a few days he went to Caesarea (to visit Cornelius - Acts 10:23). He returned to Jerusalem (Acts 11:18) for a short time. Then he went to Antioch in Syria (as did Barnabas). This is attested to by Anacletus (Ep. iii), Marcellus (Ep. iii), St. Innocent I (Ep. xiv), St. Damasus in the Pontifical Book, St. Jerome in the "De Viris Illustribus" etc.

Peter?s episcopacy in Antioch lasted seven years (St. Leo, Sermon on Sts. Peter and Paul). Eleven years after the Ascension (the second year of Claudius), Peter went to Rome, first visiting Jerusalem (Acts 12, where he is thrown in prison, then rescued by an angel). The Roman Martyrology records the converts he sent to various parts, e.g. to Sicliy he sent Pancras, Marcian, and Berillus; to Verona he sent Exuperius, etc.

In the seventh year of his Roman pontificate, Claudius expelled all the Jews (and the Christians, who were regarded as a Jewish sect) from Rome. St. Peter returned to Jerusalem. Paul and Barnabas came for him over the dispute at Antioch (Acts 15:8). This Council took place in the 10th year of Claudius.

(Paul was converted the year after the Ascension, and went to see Peter in Jerualem in the third year of his conversion (Gal. 1:18); fourteen years later he went again to Jerusalem (Gal 2:1) and attended the Council (Acts 15). So there were eighteen years from the Crucifixion to the Council of Jerusalem, which would be the tenth year of Claudius' reign.)

Claudius died after a reign of thirteen years, and his four-year edict of expulsion against the Jews died with him. It was during this four-year spell that Paul wrote his epistle to the Romans. Nero succeeded, and Christians began returning to Rome (including Aquila and Priscilla). Peter returned to Rome in the first year of Nero's reign. Two years later Paul joined Peter in Rome as a prisoner. (So how come Paul found the Jews in Rome knew the Christian religiononly by report, if Peter had been there? The solution is that the Jews who had been banished did not return.)

Two years later (fourth year of Nero's reign), Paul, now set free, spent some time in Rome, then left for Spain.

In the tenth year of Nero (22nd year of Peter's pontificate, 64 AD), Rome was set on fire. Nero blamed the Christians and began a persecution against them the following year.

In the twelfth year of Nero (68AD), Peter, who had been absent for a while, came back to Rome to revive the Church. In this year Peter wrote his second Epistle, in which he foretells his own death (1:14). Nero cast Peter and Paul into the Mamertine prison for nine months. From here Paul wrote his Second Letter to Timothy, requesting he come to Rome to witness his (Paul's) martyrdom. It was at this tme that Process and Martinian were converted, along with 47 others.
In ~68-69AD, in the 25th year of Peter's pontificate in Rome, Peter and Paul were sentenced to death.
This simple sketch should explain any difficulties which arise, e.g., how Peter could have been seven years at Antioch and twenty-five years Bishop of Rome, and yet be in Jerusalem in the 4th, 11th and 18th year after Our Lord's Ascension, as inferred from the Epistle to the Galatians and the Acts of the Apostles.



That St. Peter was Bishop of Rome is testified by:
  • Eusebius, Chronicon, 74
  • St. Irenaeus, Book III, chapter 3.
  • Dorotheus, In Synopsis.
  • St. Augustine, Epistola 53 and Contra Epistolam Fundamenti, ch. 4, title 8; in chapter 5 he writes: "I am kept in the church by the succession of Bishops from St. Peter, to whom the Lord committed the care of His sheep down to the present Bishop."
That St. Peter died in Rome is testifed by:
  • St. Augustine, de Consense Evangelistarum, Book 1.
  • Eusebius, Chronicon 71, a Christo nato.
  • Paul Orosius, History, Book VIII.
  • St. Maximus, Sermon v on the Birthday of the Apostles.
  • Origen, Book III on Genesis, as stated by eusebius, HIstory, Book III, ch. 2.
  • St. Jerome, Book of Illustrious Men.
Calvin: "I cannot withstand the consent of those writers who prove that Peter died at Rome." Institutes, Book IV.


You have mis-represented the prayer of Jesus in Peter's behalf.
That's terrible.


You have Misrepresented Scripture and Protestant Historical Scholars and that is even worst.
 
Upvote 0

Ormly

Senior Veteran
Dec 11, 2004
6,230
94
✟7,151.00
Faith
Christian
Where is that in Scripture?

Let's see.

Act 10:9¶On the morrow, as they went on their journey, and drew nigh unto the city, Peter went up upon the housetop to pray about the sixth hour:
Act 10:10And he became very hungry, and would have eaten: but while they made ready, he fell into a trance,
Act 10:11And saw heaven opened, and a certain vessel descending unto him, as it had been a great sheet knit at the four corners, and let down to the earth:
Act 10:12Wherein were all manner of fourfooted beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air.
Act 10:13And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat.
Act 10:14But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean.
Act 10:15And the voice [spake] unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, [that] call not thou common.
Act 10:16This was done thrice: and the vessel was received up again into heaven.
Act 10:17¶Now while Peter doubted in himself what this vision which he had seen should mean, behold, the men which were sent from Cornelius had made enquiry for Simon's house, and stood before the gate,
Act 10:18And called, and asked whether Simon, which was surnamed Peter, were lodged there.
Act 10:19While Peter thought on the vision, the Spirit said unto him, Behold, three men seek thee.
Act 10:20Arise therefore, and get thee down, and go with them, doubting nothing: for I have sent them.


Where is that in scripture?




Oh Sure!


You ignore Christian History even by non Catholic Scholars.

About 34AD ( Acts 2:41), we have an early mention of Peter. Some days later, in Acts 5:19, Peter is freed from prison by an angel. He spends four years in Jerusalem (Acts 8:25). St. Paul arrived at the beginning of Peter's fourth year (Acts 9:27-28). In the same year Peter (Acts 9:32) went to Joppe, raised Tabitha, and had the linen vision (Acts 10:11-12). After a few days he went to Caesarea (to visit Cornelius - Acts 10:23). He returned to Jerusalem (Acts 11:18) for a short time. Then he went to Antioch in Syria (as did Barnabas). This is attested to by Anacletus (Ep. iii), Marcellus (Ep. iii), St. Innocent I (Ep. xiv), St. Damasus in the Pontifical Book, St. Jerome in the "De Viris Illustribus" etc.

Peter?s episcopacy in Antioch lasted seven years (St. Leo, Sermon on Sts. Peter and Paul). Eleven years after the Ascension (the second year of Claudius), Peter went to Rome, first visiting Jerusalem (Acts 12, where he is thrown in prison, then rescued by an angel). The Roman Martyrology records the converts he sent to various parts, e.g. to Sicliy he sent Pancras, Marcian, and Berillus; to Verona he sent Exuperius, etc.

In the seventh year of his Roman pontificate, Claudius expelled all the Jews (and the Christians, who were regarded as a Jewish sect) from Rome. St. Peter returned to Jerusalem. Paul and Barnabas came for him over the dispute at Antioch (Acts 15:8). This Council took place in the 10th year of Claudius.

(Paul was converted the year after the Ascension, and went to see Peter in Jerualem in the third year of his conversion (Gal. 1:18); fourteen years later he went again to Jerusalem (Gal 2:1) and attended the Council (Acts 15). So there were eighteen years from the Crucifixion to the Council of Jerusalem, which would be the tenth year of Claudius' reign.)

Claudius died after a reign of thirteen years, and his four-year edict of expulsion against the Jews died with him. It was during this four-year spell that Paul wrote his epistle to the Romans. Nero succeeded, and Christians began returning to Rome (including Aquila and Priscilla). Peter returned to Rome in the first year of Nero's reign. Two years later Paul joined Peter in Rome as a prisoner. (So how come Paul found the Jews in Rome knew the Christian religiononly by report, if Peter had been there? The solution is that the Jews who had been banished did not return.)

Two years later (fourth year of Nero's reign), Paul, now set free, spent some time in Rome, then left for Spain.

In the tenth year of Nero (22nd year of Peter's pontificate, 64 AD), Rome was set on fire. Nero blamed the Christians and began a persecution against them the following year.

In the twelfth year of Nero (68AD), Peter, who had been absent for a while, came back to Rome to revive the Church. In this year Peter wrote his second Epistle, in which he foretells his own death (1:14). Nero cast Peter and Paul into the Mamertine prison for nine months. From here Paul wrote his Second Letter to Timothy, requesting he come to Rome to witness his (Paul's) martyrdom. It was at this tme that Process and Martinian were converted, along with 47 others.
In ~68-69AD, in the 25th year of Peter's pontificate in Rome, Peter and Paul were sentenced to death.
This simple sketch should explain any difficulties which arise, e.g., how Peter could have been seven years at Antioch and twenty-five years Bishop of Rome, and yet be in Jerusalem in the 4th, 11th and 18th year after Our Lord's Ascension, as inferred from the Epistle to the Galatians and the Acts of the Apostles.



That St. Peter was Bishop of Rome is testified by:
  • Eusebius, Chronicon, 74
  • St. Irenaeus, Book III, chapter 3.
  • Dorotheus, In Synopsis.
  • St. Augustine, Epistola 53 and Contra Epistolam Fundamenti, ch. 4, title 8; in chapter 5 he writes: "I am kept in the church by the succession of Bishops from St. Peter, to whom the Lord committed the care of His sheep down to the present Bishop."
That St. Peter died in Rome is testifed by:
  • St. Augustine, de Consense Evangelistarum, Book 1.
  • Eusebius, Chronicon 71, a Christo nato.
  • Paul Orosius, History, Book VIII.
  • St. Maximus, Sermon v on the Birthday of the Apostles.
  • Origen, Book III on Genesis, as stated by eusebius, HIstory, Book III, ch. 2.
  • St. Jerome, Book of Illustrious Men.
Calvin: "I cannot withstand the consent of those writers who prove that Peter died at Rome." Institutes, Book IV.





You have Misrepresented Scripture and Protestant Historical Scholars and that is even worst.

How about some dates on when your referrences were written? Oh, and who wrote them?
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.